Covid Inquiry Responses ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0002 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0002.pdf Protest Penalised Against Lockdown Measures in Western Sydney My Story On 31 August 2021, I was served by NSW Police with two infringement notices for peaceful and silent protest against the draconian measures being enacted in Western Sydney. Fully vaccinated (as this was interpreted at that time) and wearing a mask, I arrived at^^^^^^^^at 9 am on 31 August 2021, carrying my sign (‘End the Lockdowns7’NSW=Police State’), and was immediately issued with an infringement notice and ‘move on’ order. Complying with the latter, I walked up ^^^^with my sign; halfway back I was again confronted by police, engaged in conversation, and issued with a second notice. The officer in this second encounter did not want to look at my vaccination certificate, surprisingly in view of the supposed ‘public health’ issues at stake. The persons gathered in ^^^Hin the largest numbers on 31 August were NSW Police. It was ironic that the situation to which my sign drew attention, was amply confirmed by police action on the day. I pleaded guilty to both infringement notices - which together amounted to more than $6000 in penalties - because I had no witnesses to support my version of events. Thanks to the NSW response to Covid-19, for the first time in my life I was considered a criminal, simply for the ‘offence’ of peaceful and solitary protest. In the event, a NSW magistrate threw out the notices (as I eventually discovered through viewing the outcomes of court cases online). General Issues For the purposes of this Federal inquiry, the larger issues remain the following: Following the NSW Government decision to enter lockdown in late June 2021, western and south-western Sydney communities bore the brunt of enforced unemployment; the forcing onto welfare of productive people; closure of small businesses (e.g. evident along the length police surveillance and harassment of innocent people, including via helicopters; devastating impacts on mental health and relationships; and criminalization of peaceful protest. My protest was a peaceful and silent objection to all these measures. The situation later in 2021, became far worse, with the prevention of unvaccinated people - or people who could not produce a certificate of vaccination (e.g. an elderly person who struggled with a phone) - from participation in normal life. We saw the sacking of many workers from their jobs, often vital ones, if they had chosen to be unvaccinated. Some, e.g. firefighters, remain - in 2023! - prevented from resuming their employment. When the story of 2021 is told by journalists and historians, in coming months and years, the authorities responsible for this situation - state premiers (enabled by a complicit federal government) and police acting as their enforcers - will not emerge in a good light. Under Covid-19, both Federal and State governments were complicit in turning Australia - the ‘lucky country’ - into a kind of dystopia. This inquiry should, if nothing else, ensure that authorities take some responsibility for the disaster; it is unlikely to be able to help the thousands upon thousands who lost their livelihood, their health, and/or their faith in institutions. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0002 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0007 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0007.pdf COVID-19 Response Inquiry Submission by RFI Smith 1. This is an individual submission. 2. The author is a former state public servant with experience in central and operating agencies in several states, including management of emergencies. 3. The submission (and attached paper prepared in November 2020) suggest that official responses to the pandemic made governance during emergencies a matter of continuing significance. 4. The paper argues that for Australia the pandemic had no immediate local precedent. It was a phenomenon external in origin, protean in transmission and community wide in impacts. Coming to grips with it entailed a route march of professional and public controversy. 5. The paper contains two main parts. The first examines crisis governance nationally. The second discusses three cases of problems of internal governance (in New South Wales, Victoria, and the federal government) that allowed the virus to spread rapidly. The paper concludes with a brief examination of continuing issues and implications. 6. It suggests that implications for how governments worked promised to reverberate well beyond the immediate impacts of the pandemic. 7. Although the paper does not cover events beyond 2020 this submission suggests that consideration of governance implications is worthy of the Inquiry’s close attention. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0007 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0008 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0008.pdf Submission to the Australian Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry My observations on the effects of the Australian and Victorian governments’ response to the pandemic are relevant for the following people I am closely responsible for, either legally or morally: Elderly family members in residential aged care Peers in the paid workforce Adult offspring in the paid workforce including those looking after young children A school child, the youngest sibling of the above Infant grandchildren, nephew and niece Friends of varying opinions I supported very carefully the restrictions imposed by federal and state governments, because not much was known about COVID-19 and it was rapidly killing alarming numbers of people in, for example, Italy, the UK and the USA I supported and promoted the vaccines when they became available. I criticised the federal government for opting for the cheaper AstraZeneca when they could have chosen Pfizer from the start. I criticized the federal government for being slow off the mark to get RATS into the country - this cost me attendance at my daughter’s wedding, because I woke with a cold, which a PCR later revealed to not be COVID, but felt I couldn’t take the risk of it perhaps being COVID and perhaps leading to other people at the wedding dying because of my attendance. There were restrictions which I obeyed, but knew they weren’t scientific and quite possibly counterproductive, like the requirement to wear masks even when exercising outdoors (unless you were a jogger or a cyclist). This led to people not taking their limited opportunity for walking outside in nature, and almost certainly contributed to the development of long term mental health problems still negatively affecting so many Australians. The singles bubbles absolutely should have been there from day one - and actively promoted by governments to make sure no-one was isolated - the percentage of Australians who live alone is increasing and it is not good for any person to be isolated from all others for prolonged periods of time. My school child had two terms away from school last year due to social and COVID anxiety and will need to continue psychologist consultation to maintain strategies to overcome these fears - the psychologist was exactly the right solution to the problem even though it took two full terms to get the child back in the school classroom. I could afford the psychologist for my child, but the majority of parents just wouldn’t be able to - next pandemic all school children should get bulk-billed under Medicare psychologist appointment so there is no discrimination of chance of recovery between the well off and everyone else. The babies born in my family during the lockdowns suffered various developmental delays due to not seeing anyone but their parents - slow to smile and slow to babble. New parents were unsupported, which is dangerous for the babies too - we have a falling birthrate and everyone who does choose to have and succeeds in having a baby needs to be as strongly supported as is possible. I strongly objected to fathers-to-be not permitted to attend the mother of their child’s ultrasounds - our society needs to increase the sense of responsibility of men for the children they father and bring it up to the level of the sense of responsibility a woman extends to her child. Treating the father as unnecessary at any stage of a pregnancy is not what our society should be doing at this stage of the quest for financial and every other type of equality between men and women. I felt the anti-vax response from so many was a clear indication that more science about vaccinations needs to be taught in schools - school children need to know about diseases for which vaccinations have made such a difference, and the science of how those vaccinations made that difference. We teach children in schools about why smoking and alcohol are not good for health and now clearly we need to teach them more carefully and thoroughly about disease prevention and vaccination science in particular. On science I would like as much retrospective research completed as possible -1 feel that even now the science on how effective masks are is rather imprecise and incomplete. COVID continues to sweep through aged care institutions with massive quantities of plastic PPE stuff going to landfill daily - why is covering the whole body in plastic necessary? I understand the science of N95 mask and visor when visiting someone infected with COVID because the airborne droplets enter through all the orifices of the face. The main lasting effect the pandemic has had on me is to make me an aged care reform activist. I will never forget and never forgive the shocking realisation that the aged care system in Australia was so ignorant of both gerontic healthcare science and the human rights of those in the last stage of the lifespan that aged care facility managers were given carte blanche to deny residents in whatever way they chose and for however long they chose the visits of the Powers of Attorney they had appointed to monitor their care. In residential aged care more people died of neglect and despair than died of COVID, because SHAMEFULLY Australia’s 1997 aged care act separated the medical care of the very elderly into a cheaper far less scientific system, which the pandemic showed denied the very elderly not only healthcare, but their human rights The aged care royal commission did a fantastic job of their reports “Neglect” and “Care, Dignity and Respect”, but they failed to appreciate the human rights aspects. Now we have the Disability Royal Commission report which fills those gaps and the two reports combined need to give those disabled by the ageing process the same level of human rights as the disability royal commission advocates. Until the federal government legislates to make it immediately legally enforceable for Powers of Attorney to have same access as staff to residents in aged care facilities, I will never use residential aged care again and will strongly and proactively urge any fellow Australians I discuss aged care with against committing their loved one to residential aged care because their human rights are utterly unprotected. We would not allow our child to attend a school where the principle could make individual decision to keep the child and refuse the parent access. The pandemic revealed that is exactly the situation those that are unwise enough (like myself because I just didn’t think that a country like Australia could possibly be so backward) to put themselves ora loved one into residential aged care. Effective legislation, preferably with admission of wrong, would be needed to change my stance on this. Thank you hugely for the opportunity for members of the public to contribute to the inquiry. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0008 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0009 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0009.pdf I am a small business owner and also the parent the pandemic started. The pandemic naturally brought a lot of stress and fear. The business support response by both the federal and state government in Victoria were the only thing that allowed my business to survive the lockdowns in Melbourne. However, I do wholeheartedly support the lockdown response as a means to keep stress off the health system and to allow us the chance to be vaccinated first. Online schooling although difficult allowed my oldest child who^^^^^|and struggles within the ill equipped education system to thrive. Working from home allowed my husband to connect with his family more than he had been able to before and brought balance and flexibility to our home. All of this should be an ongoing option for children and adults long term. Many children are anxious within the education system because of its numerous and many downfalls and discriminatory practices. There should be learning from home options for all children. Working from home has shown to allow for better productivity as people are able to work flexibly around their families. Sending children back to school before they had the chance to be adequately vaccinated was not only a mistake but a complete failure on the governing body’s behalf. Children were used as a means to get adults back to the workplace. Something that studies have shown is not any more beneficial productivity wise.^^^^my children have now had covid from the school system. My youngest now ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^■Neither of my children are eligible for a booster. Something that goes against what many other countries are doing. Children have not been protected and I look forward to the day the government is sued for this negligence. Good luck with your inquiry. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0009 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0010 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0010.pdf As a secondary teacher with children I had been forced to stay home on 3 separate occasions as a close contact, using up all of my sick pay. In^^^^Heducation, we had to use up all of our sick pay, then our long service leave, before being able to access paid pandemic leave. It is difficult to understand why when state school teachers didn't have to do this. So when I did get covid, I had run out of sick pay and had to go back to work before I was fully recovered. I was incredibly fatigued and spent all of my time in bed except for my working hours for four months. I got covid again and again had little time to recover at home. After that I felt shortness of breath and extreme fa t i g u e started to get sick every^^^^^^^^|sick enough to have to stay in bed for at least seven days at a time this was very debilitating and depleting. caught covid again in I have been unable to return to work. I have been to four GP's, a rheumatologist and naturopath and had acupuncture, osteopathy, bioresonance and spent thousands of dollars on supplements and medications. I have had very little support from my workplace and the community. I learned all I could about long covid and its treatments from social media as peer reviewed articles are difficult to find. Many doctors and specialists were dismissive and this was very stressful; it took^^| GPS before I finally found one who ddiagnose me with long covid^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^even though my symptoms were very common and all of the symptoms started after I first got covid. The lack of support and understanding has been very stressful. There are many people who have lost their jobs and who didn't have income protection, they're suffering even more. There are also many children who are suffering from this condition. It is disheartening to go to the doctors and see that nobody is wearing a mask, this is very inconsiderate towards people who have a weakened immune system. The same thing happens at the shops: sick people coughing and sneezing without wearing a mask. People should be asked to wear a mask in healthcare settings and crowded indoor places if they are sick or symptomatic - this is because covid is still circulating and the more times you get infected the more likely you are to develop complications. 9.5 million people in the United States have long covid. There are more and more joining the facegroup books every week. The wait times for Clinic 19 has exploeded. They can't keep up with demand. They need to be able to be kept as telehealth for people who can't travel to see them. We need GP's to be trained to be alert for the symptoms of long covid so that people can get timely support. Their needs to be a National Register of practitioners who have experience and knowledge in treating long covid patients, workplaces need to be made aware of the prevalence of long covid so that staff can be supported to recover fully and adjustments can be made for the and schools also need to understand that many children as suffering from long COVID and they too need to be supported as well as their families. Forcing teachers to go back to work when everyone else except health care workers were asked to stay home and stay safe is something that made us feel totally expendable. As teachers we have record numbers of staff going on leave or resigning because they are utterly exhausted more research needs to be done on the biomedical level building on research that has already been completed overseas. We need 2 develop new guidelines on how to treat long covered based on clinical trials that have already happened overseas. I can also say that the best treatments for^^| has been taking Hl and H2 antihistamines, Low dose naltrexone and a low histamine diet. Patanol eyedrops have been good for brain fog and CBD oil has been good for sleep. A lot of people develop leaky gut and there are supplements and dietary guidelines that can help with this. Traditional Chinese medicine seems to help a lot of people as they have a very long history of treating post viral illness, as do naturopaths. There are other mast cell stabilisers that have worked like nigella sativa. Nattokinase and serrapeptase have been good in breaking down the amyloid fibrin microclots. CoQlO is great for fatigue and Vitamin TTFD Bl and nicotinic acid have been really good for fatigue as well. Vitamin D and C are essential. A very high protein diet helps. Getting morning sun is important, grounding, IR saunas, cold water therapy, HELP apheresis, I VIG therapy, all have shown good results in many patients. GPs should have all this information in their arsenal. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0010 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0011 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0011.pdf What are the main concerns about COVID-19 and vaccinations coming from the community? The effects of the vaccine Rules around mask wearing , social distancing • What are the barriers to accessing information on COVID-19 and the vaccination program? Information is lacking in the Italian community- no media coverage in home languages No literacy provided or distributed at their community groups • What are the issues and concerns surrounding COVID-19 and the vaccination program? Many seniors have only had 3 vaccines and too afraid to have more because of the misinformation in the community about health implications arising from vaccines Doctors are not actively encouraging seniors to have booster vaccines • What is the general attitude of your community on COVID 19 management and vaccinations Some seniors don't believe COVID will affect them or have had adverse side effects from previous vaccines There is little social distancing • Any other comments you would like to add More media information should be available in home languages and there is no proactive advice about booster vaccines from gps Seniors only wear masks at medical clinics but not at shopping centres or workplaces ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0011 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0012 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0012.pdf A call for submissions and evidence to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry Ref: https://www.pmc.gov.au/covid-19-response-inquiry/consultation Dear Sir/Madam Thank you for your invitation to submit my thoughts in relation to the Government’s handling on the Covid pandemic. My submission constitutes this covering letter and introduction, plus four papers that 1 have prepared and which are available online at the following addresses: https://www.fighting4fair.com/uncategorized/has-there-been-a-surge-in-domestic-violence-during- the-covid-19-pandemic/ https ://www. fighting4 fair, com/uncategorized/maj or-sporting-events-domestic-violence-myth/ https ://www. fighting4fair. com/uncategorized/rights-are-for-women-responsibi lities-are-for-men/ https://www.fightmg4fair.com/uncategorized/so-what-exactly-is-the-domestic-violence-industry/ My submission addresses just one component of what was, and remains, a complex issue. My submission concerns the use of the pandemic as a major source of revenue largely by a collection of non-profit organisations. The group, which in this submission shall be labelled the ‘feminist lobby’ appeared to obtain many millions of dollars from the Australian federal and state governments. Their prime reason for seeking these grants or allocations was to address what they claimed would be a major jump in the incidence of domestic violence. It is my view that this ‘epidemic’ (or whatever related term one wishes to use), largely failed to occur. Just as^^^^and other organisations have been asked to return a portion of the grants that they received, then so too should most (if not all) of the many organisations that received funds to address domestic violence and related matters. Worryingly, this situation was not a one-off and raises broader issues in relation to conditions that are (or should be) attached to all government grants. These conditions should very clearly set out the purpose of the grant including independently-sourced proof that supports the stated reason for the project, details regarding who will be spending the money, and how the effectiveness of the grant is to be measured and a report later be submitted to the relevant government minister. I appreciate that this cover letter is very brief, but I assure you that further details are provided in the four listed files. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0012 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0014 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0014.pdf Submission to COVID Inquiry Stephen Duckett Honorary Enterprise Professor, School of Population and Global Health University of Melbourne 1. The ongoing COVID pandemic has elevated infectious diseases into one of Australia's leading contemporary causes of death. 2. The debates and decisions of the first years of the pandemic have shaped the subsequent public health response. Although much was done well in those early years, much was not. 3. I have recounted the history of those years in a number of papers, the most complete being Duckett (2022b), attached to this submission. 4. The review has an opportunity to look forward into what might be done differently in the future. 5. In my view critical to that is trying to get all the players on the same page. Unfortunately, that was not the case in 2020 and 2021 as I have demonstrated. 6. So, how might that be done? At the least there should be transparency: the advice of public officials should be available for scrutiny and debate contemporaneously as I have argued in Duckett (2022a), also attached to the submission. Duckett, Stephen. 2022a. "Australia's COVID-19 response." In Democracy in Asia, edited by Ryan Hass and Patricia M. Kim, 105-112. Washington DC: Brookings Institution. Duckett, Stephen. 2022b. "Public Health Management of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia: The Role of the Morrison Government." International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19 (16): 10400. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0014 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0016 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0016.pdf PAY THE MONEY NOW.. NO JOB NO TAX.. NO JOB, PAY COMPENSATION.. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0016 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0018 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0018.pdf To: COVID-19 Response Inquiry Panel (CRIP) From: Ryan Franz Date: Wednesday, 8 November 2023 Terms of International policies to support Australians at home and abroad (including international reference: border closures, and securing vaccine supply deals with international partners for domestic use in Australia) Introduction Thank you for the opportunity to make an individual submission to CRIP, it is something I had greatly hoped would happen and I applaud the Commonwealth Government (the Government) for establishing this independent panel to ultimately improve Australia’s preparedness in the future. M^aame is Ryan Franz, I came to Australia in from as a student and became a citizen in After a few years abroad to study and travel, I returned to Sydney in to start my career. I lived in Sydney from then until late 2021, when the events oudined below, forced a change my now wife and I wished we didn’t have to make. Acknowledgements I would like to make this submission acknowledging the following realities that hold true, despite my personal experience: 1. I cannot begin to appreciate the challenges and complexities of managing a global pandemic from a Federal Government’s perspective. I do not approach this submission being critical with perfect 20/20 historical vision. I believe most Federal and State workers tried their best under very dynamic and stressful circumstances, and for the most part, I am thankful for their work that will probably never fully be appreciated; and 2. My experience sits alongside, not ahead of, many other Australians that endured a very challenging pandemic period Submission In February 2021, after a run of bad health, my mother who lived in ^^^^^^^Bnformed me that she had been diagnosed with Panel members would probably know that ^^^^|is a muscular degenerative disease with no cure. Typically, people pass away between 3-5 years from diagnosis but there are oudiers on both sides of that range. This was a terrible shock, but my wife and I had hoped that her condition progress would be slow enough for us to see her. By mid-2021 her health had deteriorated more rapidly than expected. She was largely bed bound and being fed through a tube. However, we were able to share some exciting news that we were expecting our first child (a boy) and were engaged. Again, we hoped this would give her the strength to stay with us for a bit longer so we could see her. But her health continued to deteriorate. At this stage of the pandemic, we were all aware of the restrictions put on travel, which at the time seemed to have no end in sight. Similar terrible stories were emerging of people unable to see dying or sick family members across state lines, never mind in other countries. For the most part, we understood that the world was largely in the same boat and wrestling with the challenges of protecting their populations and health systems. However, I became aware of numerous people I personally knew who were travelling internationally for work, somehow accessing quarantine and assuring their place back in the country. This is not conjecture, this is a fact, supported by similar examples of other people I personally knew who were afforded the same opportunity to travel internally, across State borders. Further compounding this sense of double standard, Australia became the country for some celebrities and high-profile individuals to fly in and out of, to see COVID out in relative safety. This was widely documented in the Australian media, with one particularly galling example being the then Prime Minister’s evangelical paster mate flying all around the US preaching the good word (I assume he got back into Australia with no dramas). In summary we had two cohorts of people, people of economic value to Australia and people of status value to Australia moving freely into and out of the country. At the time I was aware of the Compassionate Travel Exemption option the Government had established, and so I made a submission attaching a letter from my mother’s Neurologist oudining her condition and grave prognosis (Rider 1 - doctors name redacted for confidentiality). My belief was that given some people were moving around globally for relatively superficial reasons, having a terminally ill direct relative who was on death’s door, would qualify me for compassionate travel. Clearly not, I received the attached, heartless email, from the Government (Rider 2). I was absolutely floored - to have my application rejected, despite my circumstances, and for this rejection to be delivered in such a manner had a mental, emotional and physical impact on me that I cannot articulate in words - an impact that I am still grappling and struggling with on a daily basis. Please do not underestimate the ramifications of this decision and how it was managed. I was now in a situation whereby I had to weigh up two options: • Travel to^^^^^^^^o see my dying mother, with no guarantee of a way to return, knowing that this may result in missing the birth of my son; or • Stay in Australia and say goodbye to my mother via Zoom. To say that these options were troubling and unsatisfactory is an extreme understatement. However, in August/September 2021, after much consideration, and incredible support from my employer anodaer option, albeit more drastic, presented itself. We decided to uproot our lives and move to live in the ^^^vhere I could travel freely to Within weeks of making this decision, my employer had approved my transfer, arranged shipping and organised me a^^^vork visa. And as if the Government wasn’t making it hard enough to travel in the first place, we then had to get travel exemptions approved to leave Australia, incurring more costs including lawyers. When time was of the utmost and urgent importance, this added another process, more cost and time to our departure. My mother died approximately 2 weeks before we departed for the Our family was devastated, and as a direct result of the treatment received at the hands of the Government, we stuck with our decision to leave Australia to live in the^H. This was also influenced by our need to reconnect with based family and it still afforded me the ability to return to ^^^^^^Mtobury my mother. So, with a 7 month pregnant wife and a dog we departed Australia and lived in th^^Jfor 2 years. If I am honest, I cannot tell you how incredibly let down I felt by the Government’s handling of COVID at that stage. The result is that we endured enormous family anguish by being ‘trapped’ in Australia with an imminently dying parent, and so uprooted our entire life to the^H with all the physical and emotional effort that requires, and spent tens of thousands of dollars in doing so. 2 Considerations for CRIP The civic contract we have with Government is that we act as good citizens (law-abiding, tax paying, etc.) and Government works for its citizens to provide the services, infrastructure and processes for those communities to flourish. Notwithstanding the unprecedented nature of COVID and the many competing priorities for the Government, this element of its COVID response was a categoric failure and my view is that this stemmed from the fact that strategic action in the first year of the pandemic was not swift enough (paraphrasing the PM: ‘It’s not a race to get vaccines’), which backlogged the entire response and left Australian trailing the developed world (even the developing world). This cost citizens including me, time they did not have to spare. My suggestions for the future readiness as it relates to Internationalpolicies to support Australians at home and abroad (including international border closures, and securing vaccine supply deals with internationalpartnersfor domestic use in Australia)'. 1. (Prioritise the needs of citizens and residents (within and Australia and abroad) who have genuine special circumstances - not people based on their status, influence or prominence). Civics over status. It is wholly unacceptable that a person can’t access a dying relative or that families are separated for months/years if their circumstances warrant proper consideration, while ‘connected’ business people or famous individuals have freedoms that others don’t. Means tested (based on evidence) processes should be established; 2. (Quarantine) If the Government is going to be wedded to a quarantine system in the circumstance of another pandemic, then it needs to be ready to implement this system. I would have sat in a ventilated shipping container for 2 weeks if I knew I could leave Australia with a guaranteed quarantine slot upon my return. We built a sophisticated track and trace system within months, surely we can establish quarantine systems with relatively short notice or have plans in place to establish them efficiently; 3. (Special Channels) If you are going to offer channels to access special consideration for travel then actually have them function properly. I suspect that the true breakdown in this function was the complete mismanagement of the quarantine system. But no amount of explaining is going convince me that seeing a terminally ill parent that has been given months, if not weeks, to live does not fall under the Compassionate consideration category. If you are going to offer hope then deliver on it. As naive as it sounds, this was personally very damaging in my trust in the Government; 4. (The Federal Government) In very special cases the Federal Government needs to be able to centralise decision making and control the situation unilaterally. The political arguments over who was responsible for the borders and quarantine was so pathetic to listen to. Your citizens will respect control and decisiveness over blame games played out in the media. In these times we don’t care about politics, we care about net effective outcomes. Thank you for making this submission possible, hopefully we never have to use any of the suggestions put forward to CRIP but I hope that as a nation, we can respond far more effectively in future if needed. Thank you, Hyan Frang^ 3 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0018 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0019 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0019.pdf Submission: Covid-19 Response Inquiry Need for suitable isolation/quarantine accommodation: Clearly, there were issues regarding the provision of suitable quarantine/isolation facilities. Satisfactory ventilation was an issue, resulting in people being cross-infected whilst in makeshift accommodation in hotels, etc. We need some purpose designed and built facilities situated near - but not in - major population centres. Quicker response from Federal Government: At one stage then PM Morrison announced there was not a problem, he’d be off to the footy at the weekend! It was pressure from the premiers and first ministers that forced Morrison to be responsive (and responsible). There needs to be a clear system in place for speedy assessment of emerging risks and appropriate responses. Mask mandating: In situations where masks are an appropriate response, property owners/managers must be empowered to refuse entry to people who are not wearing masks. There were several cases where I entered supermarkets and other stores where people were not wearing masks, but store managers were powerless to enforce this requirement. Access to green spaces: In Tasmania, there was a lack of consistency between local government areas regarding access to parks and reserves. Hobart and several other councils permitted people to access reserves, whilst partitioning off BBQs, etc. to prevent groups from forming. However, in my area, Glenorchy Council barred all access to parks and reserves. This meant that, in order to obtain satisfactory exercise, I was forced to use footpaths to reach suitable locations. This meant that people were forced to used limited spaces, resulting in having to be close to other people. In my case, I was walking up hill on a footpath on the way home when a cyclist came up behind me huffing and puffing. On another occasion an individual crossed the road onto the footpath I was using a few metres in front of me. There was no need for him to cross the road at this point, as he continued on past me for several minutes. I this case, I suggest that state governments develop policies regarding access to green spaces to permit public access for individuals and family groups, consistent with social distancing recommendations. Clearly the risk of transmission is going to be much less in ventilated outdoor areas than in enclosed spaces, such as supermarkets. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0019 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0021 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0021.pdf 11.11.2023 Submission to Covid 19 Enquiry My name is Morny Cochrane and I live in Melbourne. I have three adult sons. This submission refers to the Covid Restrictions' impact on our entire family: one of complete and lifelong devastation. My middle son ^^^^|was working with the^^fin as the With lock downs and workin^rom home became severely depressed and took his own life in December 2021. His body was found hanging in his apartment three weeks later, with us being notified on January 10th 2022. We were aware of his condition but my attempts to gain permission to go to were unheard. We were unable to get information from^^H from the Red Cross (for privacy reasons], from his doctor (same reason] and he gradually cut off all his friends. He was unable to travel to Australia for the same reason and as his communication ceased with us our desperation escalated but literally no one would take my concerns seriously. After^^^Jbody was found the worldwide ^^Hwere utterly shell shocked and bewildered by his action. He was well loved, extremely competent at his role and well known in many countries for his humanitarian commitment, his courage and his sense of humour. The world is poorer for his absence. ^^|and his wife were separated but lived within view of each other's apartments so as to care for their beautiful son It was^^^J who raised the alarm that something wasn't right after she returned from her Christmas holidays and realised his car hadn't moved. Nothing can help our situation I know. I will never come to terms with this senseless loss, and probably never forgive those for whom "Privacy issues" over road plain common sense. Some at the have been able to admit they could have done more. No one expects someone of calibre, intelligence, recognition and talent to commit suicide. My decision to share this pain with you is to make sure there is always an avenue in the future for travel to be allowed in these urgent circumstances. Mental health is now so much part of daily life but my calls to anywhere I could think of brought me no avenue. I was told several times that I needed information from^^J medical people. How on earth was I able to get that? His medical practitioner and his superiors at all refused me information on ^^^^tatus. He died alone and no one knew for three weeks!! As^^^Jmother I am proud of the work he did, of the difference he made to so many lives, of the man he was, the father he was and the son and brother he was. Pride doesn't fill the void, nor does time seem to ease the guilt I live with that we somehow allowed this tragedy to happen. Please, as you review Australia's covid strategy do not forget the^^^Hwe ignored and lost. Thank you for your time, Yours sincerely, Morny Cochrane ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0021 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0022 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0022.pdf Submission to the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry This submission is provided by Peter Wilkins PhD who is an Adjunct Professor at The John Curtin Institute of Public Policy (JCIPP) at Curtin University. He is a researcher in the fields of evaluation, performance, accountability and governance in the public and not for profit sectors. He has nearly forty years’ experience in and around the public sector in accountability and oversight roles as well as having worked in line and central agencies. The submission relates to the Governance term of reference and was prompted by the statement on the “Scope of inquiry” on the website stating that the inquiry will also consider how evidence was used or produced during implementation of interventions “... and ideas to improve evidence-based pandemic prevention and response practices”. It is mainly drawn form a piece of work undertaken in 2021 and published in 2023 as a book chapter. The chapter is titled “The Role of Evaluative Information in Parliamentary Oversight of the Australian Government’s Responses to the Pandemic”. The book titled “Policy Evaluation in the Era of COVID-19” has chapters addressing issues in other countries that may also provide relevant information to the current Inquiry. 12 My chapter explored how parliamentary committees have responded to the challenge of holding Government to account in relation to its responses to the pandemic and in particular the role of evaluative information. It focused on the work underway by the Senate Select Committee on COVID-19. Evaluative information can come from many sources including evaluations, performance reporting, and performance auditing and my chapter emphasised the importance of assessing its quality, including 1 Wilkins, P.(2023). The Role of Evaluative Information in Parliamentary Oversight of the Australian Government’s Responses to the Pandemic. Chapter in P. Eliadis, I. A. Naidoo, and R. C. Rist (Eds.) 'Evaluation in the Era of Covid-19’. Abingdon, Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Policy- Evaluation-in-the-Era-of-COVID-19/Eliadis-Naidoo-Rist/p/book/9781032452968 and available as Open Access. 2 McGill University is hosting a webinar involving book authors, see https://www.mcgill.ca/maxbellschool/events/policv-evaluation-era-covid-19 for event information and registration. reliability, validity, credibility, legitimacy, functionality, timeliness, and relevance. The chapter contrasted the role of evaluative information alongside the role of opinions expressed by stakeholders. The chapter referred to themes that arose from an analysis of the scrutiny of the Global Financial Crisis to identify measures which are also relevant in the current context, including the recognition of context; the need for clear programme objectives; explicit design principles; and governance.3 The role of evaluations and evaluators could usefully be assessed, particularly how they contributed information to inform the many decisions and judgments being made in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. It can have this role alongside contributing to learning and accountability. In terms of how evidence is produced it could be relevant to consider the extent and nature of coordination between State, Territory and the Commonwealth Auditors General to enable a consolidation of their findings. Peter Wilkins 12 November 2023 •5 Wilkins, P., D. Gilchrist and J. Phillimore (2021). Independent review of emergency economic stimulus measures: Global Financial Crisis and COVID-19. Australian Journal of Public Administration. 80 12-28. https://doi.org/10.llll/1467-8500.12437 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0022 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0023 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0023.pdf I'm an educated financial planner with^^^^^^^^experience giving advice, analyzing statistics, with a followed the reported statistics throughout the Covid period with concern about media inflammation on the topic and the lack of specific data reporting publicly, although information was provided here: COVID-19 reporting | Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care. Fear was an outcome obtained and the bullying of the Australian public by State and Federal governments was not in the interest of individuals. The inaccurate reporting is concerning, so too was the single treatment response advocated, along with the ineffective government stimulus program. Many questions are asked in this submission to drive conversation on risk / return and who really was most at risk, as I don't want to see Australian's bullied into a single health response in the future. "Stay Safe" was the mantra of the day for a flu, termed Covid-19, Coronavirus based, novel in nature, a flu type virus which the world has encountered in the past and will encounter in the future. This has been the case for thousands of years, we live with many viruses, most are harmless otherwise we would already all be dead! Statistics are information used to infer relevance and particularly so in finance, with a risk / return tradeoff, which can be applied to health. How many times were questions raised about the accuracy of the reported Covid death figures? "Did he die with Covid, or from Covid" was common, particularly by families with elderly parents passing, with 2.5+ co-morbid conditions, though pre­ existing health information wasn't reported. The information I collated was based on Covid-19 website reported numbers, though I believe these to be at best overinflated, and uninteresting modest when compared to historical flu / pneumonia deaths, as reported by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), which in 2018: https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-alerts/novel-coronavirus- 2019-ncov-health-alert/coronavirus-covid-19-case-numbers-and-statistics was 3,102. By the 19/3/2022 total Covid deaths were 5,397 since the "pandemic" commenced early 2020, though the ABS figure is for a 12-month period. Why was this pandemic reported on everyday by state leaders as so deadly, with the ONLY health recommendation t get vaccinated? Attempting to vaccinate against virus that would look different in me than you, with the same approach is an unintelligent approach to health. Why was the Australian public told to have the "safe and effective" vaccine, as it stops transmission, sorry, reduces symptoms, though so too would vitamin C. Billions have taken an experimental vaccine approved for emergency use after discrediting decades long established, Nobel prize winning alternatives including Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine. What due diligence did the Australian State and Federal governments take to support this approach? I am pro science, though there were no randomized double-blind placebo-controlled gold standard studies on non-liability pharmaceutical companies, why? The Australian public was bullied with limited information, forced to stay at home, give up employment if not vaccinated, facing^Jambasting that "no one forced you to get vaccinated". There was no choice for most as large corporates required vaccination for employee's, how is that legal, and then other sectors such as health cry out for workers they just fired! What protections will the government put in place to provide freedom of medical choice? Policies aren't levied against political, sexual, and religious beliefs yet, so will the Australian public lose their health autonomy under the premise of "safe and effective" in the future? The data captured until the 19/3/2022 includes the following from the Covid-19 website mentioned above, with some comments added for insight to draw relevance / risk to the information: Australia Covid deaths 27/10/2020 24/10/2021 19/03/2022 Total Total Male Female Male Female Male Female Deaths % 90+ 114 199 156 236 615 726 1341 24.85 over 80-89 181 195 298 283 1,150 805 1955 36.22 61.07% 80 over 70-79 99 55 207 126 781 394 1175 21.77 82.84% 70 over 60-69 26 12 104 44 351 174 525 9.73 92.57% 60 50-59 10 5 56 34 150 90 240 4.45 under 40-49 2 0 20 9 55 35 90 1.67 2.91% 50 30-39 2 0 7 5 31 19 50 0.93 20-29 1 0 6 2 11 4 15 0.28 under 10-19 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 0.037 0.04% 20 0-9 0 0 0 0 1 3 4 0.001 Totals 435 466 855 740 3,146 2,251 5397 100% Combined 901 1,595 5,397 For the period until 901 694 3,802 Total Average Total Cases over 2 years 3,630,413 Tests 65,112,260 Death age 80.65 Total Total Cases as % of tests 5.58% Deaths 5,397 Cases to 6/11/2021 177,393 4.89% Australian Population 25.98M Total cases to 20/08/2021 41,522 1.14% Total cases to Cases since 24/10/2021 3,474,041 95.69% of total 24/10/2021 156,372 4.31% New deaths (since 29.55 24/10/21) 3,802 70.45% of total Deaths to 24/10/2021 1,595 % Total Death rate as% Average age at death 80.65 of total cases 0.15% Survival Rate (since Survival Rate (to 24/10/21) 99.89% 24/10/21) 98.98% % population infected (over 2 years) 13.975% % population healthy, never sick. 86.025% Herd immunity is a positive consequence of living in a society and the information clearly highlights who was most likely to die from Covid-19, the elderly. Though schools were closed, businesses were shut down, and then $320 million dollars was printed and pumped into the economy inefficiently, increasing national debt by 60% and creating inflationary pressures over time through an increased money supply. Australian's were bullied out of a job and into a forced medical procedure when the majority of the workforce, under 60 years of age, accounted for less than 10% of total Covid deaths! Why wasn't this information communicated to the Australian public to provide context that deaths were mostly in the elderly, you know with on average more than 2.5 co-morbid conditions? I saw lives ruined financially and then medically, as personal health has deteriorated following the receipt of an experimental vaccine, requiring the cessation of employment, exercise even due to heart related conditions. The whole Covid-19 charade was at the expense of the Australian people, where the survival rate of Covid was 98.98%, with the average age of death being 80.65. Only 10% of deaths related to 60-69-year-olds, with 82.84% of deaths in individuals over age 70, though an entire workforce was sent home. What psychological health issues have been forced upon the entire nation when the survival rate was 99%? In summary, reported information should be accurate and communicated appropriately by the media, this data should include a summary of the individual's death and pre-existing conditions. Medical treatments require gold standard assessment prior to "forced" distribution, this is required and involve independent, unbiased, non-conflicted medical professionals from around the world. A 60% increase to national debt to address a problem the government created should not have occurred, the economy should never go into lock down again, particularly as those at risk are retired. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0023 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0025 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0025.pdf 14 November 2023 Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet Australian Government COVID-19Inquiry@pmc.gov.au Dear Independent Panel Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission to the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry. We do so in a personal capacity. We have been working over the past two years on a project examining how Australian Parliaments responded to the COVID-19 pandemic. As part of this work, we identified core functions that Parliament should play during a public health emergency. We then assessed Australian Parliaments against these functions. Below we set out several key findings from our study, relating to the Commonwealth Parliament. We have attached a recent paper that expands on this material and is forthcoming in the UNSW Law Journal. The Commonwealth Parliament did not meet regularly at the height of the crisis. It is important that Parliament meet regularly during a public health emergency. Fundamentally, the government’s mandate rests on the support of the legislature. In times of anxiety and crisis that support may waver, and the government is under an obligation to demonstrate it continues to maintain the confidence of the people through their representatives. Regular meetings also play a legitimating function. Simply by assembling and deliberating, even where outcomes are largely preordained, parliaments can reduce societal tension and enhance support amongst the populace. Failing to sit regularly may have contributed to social unrest during the pandemic. The pandemic severely affected the capacity of the Commonwealth Parliament to meet its core function of regular sittings. It was not alone. In 2020, every Australian parliament - except for the Parliament of Western Australia - sat for fewer days than their recent historical average pre-COVID-19. The Commonwealth Parliament, however, performed amongst the worst. In 2020, the Parliament sat for 21 days less than its recent historical average. This failure was most pronounced at the height of the crisis. Between late March 2020 and May 2020, the Parliament met only five times. During this period legislation of great significance was being passed. On 23 March 2020, the Parliament passed legislation authorising $66 billion in spending. At the next sitting on 8 April, $130 billion of spending was authorised. The failure to sit regularly meant that these funding commitments did not receive appropriate debate. It is not clear why Parliament did not sit regularly when technology was available to facilitate safe sittings. The Parliament recognised this fact but did not work expeditiously to make it possible. On 23 March 2020 it adopted a resolution to facilitate hybrid sittings. It was not until 20 August, however, that it agreed to allow members unable to travel to Canberra to participate remotely. Even then, significant restrictions were placed on those who attend online. Members participating remotely were not permitted to vote, be counted for a quorum, move motions, propose, or support a proposal to discuss a matter of public importance or call a division. Here, even when Parliament sat - many of its members were not able to contribute. Their constituents were left short-changed. This practice may also have breached ss 23 and 40 of the Constitution. The Commonwealth Parliament allowed time for debate on key measures and issues, but pairing arrangements were problematic. During a crisis, when urgent measures are required, the slow and deliberative legislative process may be unsuitable. At the onset of the pandemic, parliaments accepted that standing orders would need to be suspended to facilitate the expedited debate and passage of key measures. In the Commonwealth Parliament, business for the 23 March 2020 and 8 April 2020 sittings was restricted to urgent matters relating to COVID-19. However, while opportunities for debate were more limited than usual, government bills were not simply introduced into parliament to be ratified. Members and Senators were able to discuss each bill and propose amendments. The Coronavirus Economic Response Package Omnibus Bill 2020 was even amended in the Senate. Debate was brief, but its existence was a recognition that constructive and genuine engagement from Members, drawing from issues experienced by their constituents could improve the government’s immediate response. Time may have been provided for debate on key measures and issues in the Parliament, but social distancing requirements and the need to reduce the risk of transmission meant that not all Members could attend sessions; many were paired. Pairing arrangements were important. They preserved the government’s narrow majority while facilitating the meeting of Parliament in uncertain times. However, the extent of these arrangements weakened Parliament’s representative character. On 23 March 2020, for example, fewer than 20 per cent of Members who attended were women, no Tasmanian MPs attended, and neither did the two Indigenous Members. The extensive use of pairs should be avoided. Alternative options to facilitate the presence of Members should be prioritised to ensure adequate representation of all Australians. Given this, it is difficult to understand why it took so long for Parliament to implement hybrid sittings. The Commonwealth Parliament did not exercise sufficient legislative oversight. Our constitutional system recognises that extreme measures may be necessary in moments of national crisis, but hastily drafted and hurriedly enacted legislation is likely to cause unintended and unexpected problems. The same is true for regulations or orders made and re-made by a Minister acting alone or a health officer. Even when Parliament is unable to sit, it has important institutional features that allow it to examine, and critique proposed laws and delegated legislation. Unfortunately, the pandemic exposed longstanding deficiencies in mechanisms of legislative oversight. Legislation empowered the executive to impose unprecedented restrictions on the community through delegated instruments. While all public health orders imposed significant impositions on the lives of Australian residents, some had life or death implications. Under the Biosecurity Act 2015 (Cth), for example, the Health Minister banned citizens from returning home if they had been in India over the prior 14 days. This decision left 9000 citizens with the choice of navigating the pandemic in India with COVID-19 rampant or returning to Australia and the possibility of a five-year jail term. Delegated legislation is not unusual, but the government relied on its powers to issue voluminous orders. Between 18 March 2020 and 17 April 2022, the Commonwealth alone made 727 legislative instruments in response to COVID-19. Many of these orders were exempt from disallowance, preventing Parliament from testing or challenging the determinations made by ministers or chief health officers. Parliamentary committees were active, providing a degree of legislative oversight. However, such was the speed with which government acted, these committees were not able to provide real-time scrutiny. The Commonwealth Parliament also largely failed to effectively scrutinise government administration and policy. Public health emergencies may require changes to parliamentary process and procedure. It is important that government act quickly to slow the spread of highly transmissible viruses and provide necessary economic support to protect the community. This does not mean, however, that parliament should abandon its critical responsibility to scrutinise government. During periods of emergency the need to scrutinise government administration and policy is all the more important. In national crises, citizens look to government to take charge. In their haste to protect the community, the executive may take extreme and sometimes disproportionate action. Unfortunately, the Australian Parliament was largely unable to hold government administration and policy to account during the pandemic. For example, following the persistence of Senator the AAT ruled that the National Cabinet was not a committee of the Commonwealth Government Cabinet. This meant it could not rely on conventions of cabinet confidentiality. Despite this victory, however, the Government refused to accept the outcome. It even went so far as to introduce legislation to exclude the National Cabinet from the Freedom of Information Act. While the bill lapsed at dissolution of the 46th Parliament, the Labor government has continued to prevent the release of National Cabinet documents. Recommendations In times of national crisis or emergency, the legislative branch of government is often perceived as unable to respond effectively. But Parliament should not abandon is constitutional and democratic responsibilities. In fact, the necessity that parliament carries out its core functions is even more apparent when the executive is exercising extraordinary powers. With those powers must come sharp scrutiny and vigilance, which Parliament is best placed to provide. Our study presents several key recommendations to better prepare our system of governance for a future public health emergency or national crisis. 1. The Parliament should conduct a comparative review into arrangements for hybrid or remote sittings to ascertain international best practice. In extreme cases, like a public health crisis, Members unable to travel to Canberra should be able to participate to the full extent. 2. Parliament should amend the Biosecurity Act 2015 (Cth) to permit it to scrutinise and overturn declarations of emergency and public health directions by the Health Minister. A review should be undertaken to identify all similar legislation. 3. The practice of issuing non-disallowable legislative instruments should cease except in exceptional and clearly identified circumstances. Yours sincerely Harry Hobbs George Williams ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0025 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0027 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0027.pdf Submission to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry - Michael Skopal My submission to the inquiry is based on my experience as a business person and private citizen. During the Covid "emergency" ! was required to navigate the maze of different rules and regulations made by federal and state bureaucrats as well as local councils. The local council responses were more humorous and inconsequential as well as demonstrating their irrelevance to our lives outside of roads, rates, and rubbish. I returned in March 2020 from a 6 month stay a mandatory 2 week self-isolation period at home (in As I was unwell anyway, lived on my own, was able to work from home and had friends and family able to support me with shopping and general support, I managed the logistics of my isolation. It was in the latter period of my 2 week self isolation period that my GP instructed me to seek a covid test as I was still unwell. This was to be my first brush with the health bureaucracy that was to dominate our lives for next two years. At had my first covid test and on completion I was told by a junior staff member that I had to isolate for a further two weeks. I explained that I had already nearly completed my two weeks required for returning overseas the individual insisted that the period had to restart because of the test, which was negative! I made a phone inquiry but could receive no clarification on the matter of further isolation from the bureaucracy so I chose to ignore the instruction. This was my first brush with what was to become, in my opinion, an era of health bureaucrats "drunk" with their own power, easily handed to them by our elected officials. During the next two years my work and family commitments took me interstate, primarily to and Fortunately I was not required to travel to^^^M Nevertheless, the constant rule changes for travellers in made even those trips unpredictable with extended stays required and^^^H The latter was in the^^^Jcaravan park in a tent with daytime temperatures approaching 40°C during the period. At one point I travelled with my partner to vr and th track. When we reached ^^^^^Hshe departed to return to At that point there was a small outbreak of Covid in I so all travellers returning from anywhere in including had to isolate in Ifor 2 weeks. This mandate was totally out of proportion with the risk and a complete over reaction by the authorities. I did write to my local member in protest. Later I found my self having to go to| by road from a property in centra where I have been working for a few weeks. This trip resulted in my only being able to return to if I was prepared to quarantine for two weeks. Again a complete over reaction by the authorities. was functioning well and business in the city and state ran as normal yet a return home was hindered. I ended up stating for 5 months before driving back via Finally, the ultimate embarrassment as aresident came towards the end of the "covid era" when friends visited me fromOn arrival they had to download an app to their phones and report their well being to the app. It was a complex app as well as being overly intrusive into their lives. These are only some of my recollections from the Covid period. As a private citizen I felt the response between states was uncoordinated, self serving for the individual bureaucrats combined with a total disregard for personal responsibility of the country's citizens. Confusing rules about self isolation combined with different definitions of "close contact" all lead me to believe that the rights and privileges of citizens were ignored. I also felt very disappointed by our elected officials who failed to balance the requirements of business and personal needs of their citizens with the overzealous demands of the health bureaucracy. I hope in future state and federal parliaments conduct themselves much better and in a far more balanced manner to allow us to make our own decisions on travel, attendance at church or other social gatherings. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0027 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0028 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0028.pdf To whom it may concern, I the Victorian/NSW border. When we went through covid, the most difficult thing to cope with, apart from the isolation, was not being able to cross the state border without a permit. It seemed like no one understood that we have to access different services on both sides of the border and that numerous people work every day on opposite sides of the border to where they live. This is something that I thought was badly managed from the start and if it is to happen again needs much better strategic planning. While I was banned from crossing the border^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H^Hwas allowed to cross because of his work. I seriously think we could learn a lot from the nation of Japan as to how we handle disease that is easily spread. I would happily comply with wearing masks as a means of prevention of spread. Also I would like the time frame of infection and ability to spread the disease more accurately described. This would help with any quarantine obligations, it has never been clear and still is not clear to me. If we only had the one health service on one side of the border here it would not cope. Both Wodonga city and Albury city handle large regional catchments of people accessing health care since the smaller fully functional hospitals around the regions were defunded by government. At the rate of regional growth in this area we will soon need a third hospital after the mess that Albury/Wodonga health has become. Our State governments need to be able to work together in times of National adversity. Thank you. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0028 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0030 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0030.pdf Dear It is many years since we last saw each other so you probably will not remember me: I was a Policy Officer in Industry Branch in The Cabinet Office in 1988. Following that, Iwas in the various iterations of the NSW Department of State Development and then Industry including a period as Senior Manager, Policy within the Office of Science and Medical Research and lastly as Principal Advisor to the Leader of the Government (the Hon Duncan Gay MLC) in the Baird Government. My original work and training was in Architecture in the offices of Public Buildings in Adelaide prior to coming to Sydney in 1988.1 have a number of other pertinent qualifications, inter alia, Grad Dip Public Administration (U Syd, 2006), and Master of Public Policy (U Syd, 2008). I am now retired and have no affiliations with any organisation, or person, that would have any interface with this Inquiry’s Terms of Reference. This submission to the Commonwealth Government COVID -19 Response Inquiry will be particularly addressing the second term of reference, viz • Key health response measures (for example across COVID-19 vaccinations and treatments, key medical supplies such as personal protective equipment, quarantine facilities, and public health messaging). Much of what I will be addressing comes from my decade long experience in the Public Buildings architectural office augmented by my experience in the NSW bureaucracy and parliament I referred to above. I wrote to the various state and federal ministers several times during the pandemic phase of the COVID -19 outbreak, expressing my concern that the response was entirely reactionary and there seemed to be no mechanism to regulate to minimise transmission of a respiratory virus within the built environment. All Australian governments seemed to be incapable of working across portfolios to minimise the health risks of any/all airborne viruses which are mostly transmitted indoors. This needs to be rectified if Australia is to minimise transmission of future pulmonary viruses and also some other infections, such as TB, which I understand is becoming increasingly multi-resistant. I believe that the most effective mechanism to minimise transmission would be to regulate the air­ flow within structures and to increase that airflow to between eight and ten air-changes per hour, up from the current, which is around two air-changes per hour. The current standard is based on comfort only and is now about half a century old. The building standards under the Building Code of Australia (BCA) are administered by the states and territories but the regulation of most sites in which transmission occurs is regulated separately from building structures, per se. The current Cabinet system now seems to be almost impossible to navigate across portfolios (especially in NSW) and I suspect that that was the main reason why my earlier comments and suggestions fell on deaf ears - all too difficult in the middle of the health crisis. My suggestions would have been easily forgotten when we managed to climb out of the recesses of lockdowns, etc. For health purposes the BCA needs to be updated (a federal matter, but that will take, at the very least, more than a decade to achieve). In addition, Standards Australia should be asked by Health to review their air conditioning standard, not as a building matter but as a health matter. Further, the prime regulation location of most venues in which transmission did occur, and appears to be again occurring (mid November 2023) does not reside in any built environment regime but within the licensing regimes for restaurants, cafes, hotels, pubs, bars, clubs, etc, in all state and territory governments. I am suggesting that the conditions of all licenses for all licensed premises be updated to require all licensed premises to have minimum standards for conditioning of the air within the premises of between 8 and 10 air-changes per hour, as an explicit condition of the license. This would need to be negotiated through the Ministerial Committees of the National Cabinet in several different portfolios and through the National Cabinet for overall driving leadership. It will need the cooperation of several responsible portfolios, in each jurisdiction, and therefore their law's and regulations. I would envisage that the response and regulation I am suggesting could be quickly implemented and at minimal direct cost to governments. The upgrading of air-conditioning systems would initially require capacity changes for both the fans and the heat exchangers, for compliance but, in the longer term many systems would need to be redesigned for optimal performance (cross-sectional areas of ducts to minimise noise, etc). This alteration and upgrading would fall within the tax arrangements of the costs of running the licensed businesses and ditto for other venues such as aged-care facilities and public theatres etc, and would be tax deductable, in most cases, at a rate of 30%. I noted, during the pandemic phase that, often noted the clear science that transmission was slowed by increasing airnow(egbeingoutside), so I will presume that she will find my suggestions and mechanisms interesting and potentially valuable. I have also tried to enunciate mechanisms for practical achievement of the policies I am suggesting, within the limited size of the submission I am permitted. I trust that my minor contribution assists your deliberations and that our country is better prepared for future pulmonary viral outbreaks. I would also hope that if this submission assists you Australia might leapfrog to world leader in built environment intervention for health purposes. At the risk of seeming trite we might achieve again the type of health/built environment interventions that Victorian engineers and planners achieved with sewers which we now take for granted. My suggestions are also not medical, per se, and so do not suffer from specific limits such as vaccines or drugs and build-up of resistance from natural selection, or genetic variation from mutation. Yours sincerely Reg. T. Fisk ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0030 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0031 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0031.pdf COVID 19 ISSUES I was convinced that with the government “forcing” everyone to have the vaccinations that the Australian medical profession would have done the due diligence & the vaccines would be safe so I went ahead & had them as soon as they became available. 27/3/2021 1st AstraZeneca VO VID injection 21/6/2021 2nd AstraZeneca CO VID injection July 2021 I started loosing muscle strength. I initially put it down to “self isolation” & COVID lockdown but now (in hindsight) I believe it was related to the AstraZeneca vaccinations. Had I recognised this I wouldn’t have had the Pfizer Booster. 16/12/2021 Pfizer COVID Booster. January 2022 I was loosing strength. I have a mine & was previously able to hold a jackhammer above my head. By late January 2022 I couldn’t even open a bottle of water. My wife had to open bottles for me or I had to hold the lid between my teeth & twist the bottle. I developed Ear Aches, Shoulder Pain & my muscle strength continued to diminish. My doctor sent me to several specialists. I believe it was all caused by the Vaccinations & Pfizer Booster. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0031 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0032 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0032.pdf Ms. Robyn Kruk AO Chair, Independent Panel Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet Dear Ms Kruk, Submission to the Independent Panel Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry Thank you for the opportunity to provide a submission to the Independent Panel conducting the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry1. As the CEO, Guidelines and Economists Network International (GENI) I will address two key areas of the Inquiry’s terms of reference concerning governance and mechanisms to better target future responses to the needs of particular populations. Background GENI is an international association that enables health economists, epidemiologists, clinicians, medical and health policy experts world-wide to work with prominent international bodies, health services, governments, and Parliaments. GENI’s agenda is to facilitate the effective integration of Clinical Practice Guidelines, economic and clinical evidence into national decision making and clinical practice in the health sector. GENI aims to forge linkages with bodies that set the standards for appropriate treatment under different conditions that may link to contracts or regulatory processes such as insurers and national government funding systems. The association aims to achieve both clinical and cost effectiveness in health care delivery and equity in related national funding and regulation. 2 3 My submission embraces a whole-of government view to effectively address the wide-ranging impacts of COVID-19 across portfolios and the community. I will address your Inquiry’s terms of reference concerning governance and mechanisms to better target future responses to the needs of particular populations. Issue 1 below addresses improved governance through providing and discussing my submission to the Senate Select Committee on COVID-194 which examined the Australian Government's health and economic response to the pandemic. Issue 2 updates issues in that submission by discussing crucial economic evaluation techniques to better target responses to the needs of particular populations during future pandemics. This will facilitate the Commonwealth’s governance and use of a whole-of government view to effectively evaluate the wide-ranging impacts of COVID-19 across portfolios and the community. My views have been published in the 2023 edition of the ‘Journal of Public Health’ (Antioch, 2023).5 This is a peer reviewed international journal. Issues Issue 1: Governance including the role of the Commonwealth Government, responsibilities of state and territory governments, national governance mechanisms (such as National Cabinet, the National Coordination Mechanism, and the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee) and advisory bodies supporting responses to COVID-19. In addressing this issue, I hereby provide and discuss my submission to the Senate Select Committee on COVID-19 which examined the Australian Government's health and economic response to the pandemic (Antioch, 2020 6). (see Attachment 1, which was published by Parliament). The recommendations in my Senate submission are outlined below. These were developed following my review of international governance approaches to addressing the pandemic by governments in Australia, UK, Germany, Denmark, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Canada, USA, and NZ7. Further information concerning the international review and rationale for my recommendations is in the attached submission. This is pertinent to your Inquiry8. My senate submission recommends the establishment of an Australian Pandemic and Health Protection Agency (APHPA) to advise the Australian Government on actions to anticipate and mitigate the social, health and economic effects of global pandemics and disease emergencies. This includes a virtuaEdz/Vrahm; Centre ofDisease Control (ACDC) in its operations 1 https://www.pmc.gov.au/covid-19-response-inquirv/consultation 2 Antioch KM Drummond M and Niessen L et al (2017) 'International Lessons in New Methods for Grading and Integrating Cost Effectiveness Evidence into Clinical Practice Guidelines' Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation Journal. 15:1 pages 1-15 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5303215/pdf/12962 2017 Article 63.pdf 3 https://geni-econ.org/ 4 Antioch, KM (2020) ‘Submission to the Senate Select Committee on COVID-19 Inquiry into the’ Australian Government’s Response to the COVID- 19 Pandemic’ Submission number 511.https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=a62cb654-eel6-4638-b82d-5ec49ce86738&subId=698467 5 Antioch, K.M. The economics of the COVID-19 pandemic: economic evaluation of government mitigation and suppression policies, health system innovations, and models of care. J Public Health (Berl.) (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/sl0389-023-01919-z 6 https://www.aph. gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=a62cb654-eel6-4638-b82d-5ec49ce86738&subId=698467 7 ibid 8 My recent research identified similar equivalent organisations in Europe (European Centre for Disease Prevention), France (French Public Health Agency ), Switzerland (Federal Office of Public Health), which further reinforce the desirability of establishing an APHPA with links to the ACDC. 1 with multiple hubs across all Australian states and territories - regional and metro, covering all aspects of infectious disease control from genetics to public policy and legislation. The APHPA would assist the Government to ensure all resources are marshalled in a cost-effective and co-ordinated manner. It would also facilitate the mobilization of a whole-of-society and whole-of-economy effort to enable success in health crises. My recommendation to establish an ACDC was subsequently recommended by the Senate Select Committee on COVID- 19 and is being implemented by the Commonwealth Government. My additional recommendations to that Senate Select Committee concerning, inter alia, the APHPA warrant further consideration by your Inquiry and are outlined below. “Recommendation I: To consolidate and maintain Australia’s successful economic and health response to the pandemic it is recommended that the Federal Government: Establish an Australian Pandemic and Health Protection Agency (APHPA) in Canberra as a non-corporate Commonwealth Entity under Acts and Regulations. The Statutory Agency should be established under an Act of Parliament in the Portfolio of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet during 2021 as a high priority to: • advise the Australian Government on actions to anticipate and mitigate the social, health and economic effects of global pandemics and disease emergencies. • work in tandem with the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) and Department of Health, who will lead the Commonwealth’s health response in pandemics and public health emergencies. • include a virtual Australian Centre of Disease Control (ACDC) in its operations with multiple hubs across all Australian states and territories - regional and metro, covering all aspects of infectious disease control from genetics to public policy and legislation. This could facilitate research collaborations between universities and businesses, with the aim of driving innovation and supporting pandemics. The virtual Australian CDC would, from 2025, forge strong links with the proposed new Australian Institute of Infectious Diseases (AIID) in Melbourne which will be the largest infectious diseases centre in the Indo-Pacific region. This Institute aims to accelerate research into the prevention of future pandemics and rapidly develop treatments and will involve the Burnet Institute and be located next to the Doherty Institute. It will involve experts from the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, the University of Melbourne, and Melbourne-headquartered global biotechnology company CSL.9 The ACDC would collaborate with the new large vaccine factory at the Melbourne airport expected to be operational by 202610 11 The Virtual ACDC would be multi-disciplinary as outlined in Recommendation 3 below. • facilitate cooperation across public-to-private and private-to-private networks to unlock resources, remove bottlenecks and rectify problems to support Australian families, communities, and businesses. • facilitate cost effective national co-ordination mechanisms for non-health and health aspects of the pandemic and in collaboration with the bodies and processes in recommendation 2 below. • ensure a governing board that can advise on both health and non-health aspects of the pandemic response including leaders across NFP, governments and private sectors. The Board should comprise strong expertise in commerce, health, medicine, finance, pandemics, law, governance, public policy, research, and economics. Recommendation 2: To facilitate the effective integration of the APHPA with current national, state and territory pandemic initiatives it is recommended that the: • APHPA work with the National COVID 19 Commission Advisory Board on non-health issues. • Virtual Australian Centre for Disease Control, working in close collaboration with the Department of Health and, from 2025, the Australian Institute of Infectious Diseases and the new vaccine factory at Melbourne Airport will ensure governments’ actions are guided by the best medical advice, while ensuring the economic and social wellbeing of all Australians is central to the response. • National Cabinet, comprising the Prime Minister, State Premiers and Territory Chief Ministers will continue to lead future pandemic national response at a government level. • Australian Government’s National Security Committee of Cabinet’s COVID-19 Taskforce and the Expenditure Review Committee of Cabinet12 will continue to make decisions that determine the Commonwealth’s response to global pandemics. 9 Jack Paynter, NCA News Wire Victoria to build Australian Institute ofInfectious Disease in Melbourne November 13 2020 https://amp.news.coni.au/teclmology/science/human-body/victoria-to-build-australian-institute-of-infectious-diseases-in-melboume/news- Story/c48230f2744b4dl6a3f89b30f4120dfb 10 Stuart Marsh Nine News PM touches down in Victoria to announce $800 million vaccine factory at Melbourne Airport https://amp.9news.com.au/article/bl5d03ee-eba7-46fl-81a3-58cc96155e94 11 Sky News Melbourne vaccine plant to secure the health of the nation and 520 construction Jobs 16 November 2020 https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6209946388001 12 https://www.pm.gov.au/media/national-covid-19-coordination-com mission 2 •National Coordination Mechanism based in the Department of Home Affairs, which coordinates the cross jurisdictional response to non-health aspects of the pandemic13, will work closely with the APHPA. The current Coronavirus Business Liaison Unit, Treasury Department will also work with the Agency. Recommendation 3: To facilitate global leadership in discoveries to mitigate pandemics and other public health emergencies, it is recommended that the APHPA will ensure that: • the virtual Australian CDC in recommendation 1 will be multi-disciplinary and include experts in epidemiology, public health, genetics, statistics, outbreak management, communications, community management, health economics, quantum computing,14 15 artificial intelligence1617 and biophysics.1718 Translational, clinical, and basic 18 sciences researchers could facilitate taking discoveries from the lab to clinics. 19 • international experts in fields in short supply in Australia to be included in the Virtual ACDC. Recommendation 4: To ensure the best health, community, and economic outcomes it is recommended that the APHPA will • assist the Government to ensure all resources are marshalled in a cost-effective and co-ordinated manner. • facilitate the mobilization of a whole-of-society and whole-of-economy effort to enable success in such health crises. • liaise with stakeholders in Australia and internationally to identify health, medical, biophysics, legal, economic, AI, quantum computing, economics, and policy advice.”20 The APHPA and ACDC could work with the Australian Protection Principal Committee, its sub-committees, and Advisory Committees to enable a One Health, ‘all hazards’ approach for communicable and non-communicable diseases with data linkage, nationally consistent analysis, advice, data security, guidelines, and an adequate National Medical Stockpile. Issue 2: Mechanisms to better target future responses to the needs ofparticular populations (including across genders, age groups, socio-economic status, geographic location, people with disability, First Nations peoples and communities and people from culturally and linguistically diverse communities). Novel economic evaluation techniques to better target responses to the needs of particular populations during future pandemics are outlined below. This can assist public health and budget decisions by the Australian Commonwealth and State governments and globally. In accordance with recommendation 4 above, this would facilitate the work of the APHPA and ACDC to assist the Government to ensure all resources are marshalled in a cost-effective and co-ordinated manner. My views on these evaluation techniques are published in the ‘Journal of Public Health’21 (See Attachment 2). The economic evaluation techniques address a whole-of-govemment view in recognition of the wide-ranging impacts of COVID-19 across portfolios and the community. An in-depth analysis of the methodologies and evaluations undertaken are included in my attached journal article entitled ‘The economics of the COVID-19 pandemic: economic evaluation of government mitigation and suppression policies, health system innovations, and models of care’. J Public Health (Berl.) (Antioch, 2023). A brief overview of my internationally peer reviewed journal article is provided below. The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the scope of health economics literature, which will increasingly examine value beyond health care interventions such as government policy and broad health system innovations. Economic evaluations and methodologies evaluating government policies suppressing or mitigating transmission and reducing COVID-19, broad health system innovations, and models of care are identified. This can facilitate future economic evaluations and assist government and public health policy decisions during pandemics22. The study found that cost utility analysis (CUA) and cost benefit analysis (CBA) analysing mortality, morbidity, quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained, national income 13 ibid 14 Ramon Szmuk Quantum computing will (eventually) help us discover vaccines in days May 16, 2020 https://venturebeat.com/2020/05/16/quantum-computing-will-eventually-help-us-discover-vaccines-in-days/ 15 Julian van Velzen Can quantum technolog)’ assist in the next COVID crises? Part 1, July 21, 2020. https://www.capgemini.com/2020/07/can-quantum-technologv-assist-in-the-next-covid-crisis-part-l/ 16 Arash Keshavarzi Arshadi et al Ari^ial Intelligence for COVID-19 drug discoveiy and vaccine development 18 August 2020. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frai.2020.00065/full 17 King J et al Biophysical Society BPS Blog Coronavirus structure, vaccine and therapy development https://www.biophysics.org/blog/coronavirus-structure-vaccine-and-therapy-development 18 Biophysical Society What is biophysics? accessed 15 November 2020 https://www.biophysics.org/what-is-biophysics 19 Sophia Zoungas Australian Financial Review Time for an Australian Centres for Disease Control November 9 2020 https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/education/time-for-an-australian-centers-for-disease-control-20201102-p56auo 20 Antioch, KM (2020) ‘Submission to the Senate Select Committee on COVID-19 Inquiry into the’ Australian Government’s Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic’ Pg 3-5, Sub No 511 https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=a62cb654-eel6-4638-b82d-5ec49ce86738&subId=698467 21 Antioch, K.M. The economics of the COVID-19 pandemic: economic evaluation of government mitigation and suppression policies, health system innovations, and models of care. J Public Health (Berl.) (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/sl0389-023-01919-z 22 ibid 3 loss, and value of production effectively evaluate government policies suppressing or mitigating COVID-19 transmission, disease, and impacting national income loss. The WHO’s pandemic economic framework facilitates economic evaluations of social and movement restrictions. Social return on investment (SROI) links benefits to health and broader social improvements. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) can facilitate vaccine prioritization, equitable health access, and technology evaluation. Social welfare function (SWF) can account for social inequalities and population-wide policy impact. SWF is a generalization of CBA, and operationally, it is equal to an equity-weighted CBA. It can provide governments with a guideline for achieving the optimal distribution of income, which is vital during pandemics. Economic evaluations of broad health system innovations and care models addressing COVID-19 effectively use cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) that utilize decision frees and Monte Carlo models, and CUAs that effectively utilize decision trees and Markov models, respectively. Several methodologies are therefore very instructive for governments, in addition to their current use of cost benefit analysis and the Value ofa Statistical Life analytical tool. CUA and CBA effectively evaluate government policies suppressing or mitigating COVID-19 transmission, disease, and impacts on national income loss. CEA and CUA effectively evaluate broad health system innovations and care models addressing COVID-19. The WHO’s framework, SROI, MCDA, and SWF can also facilitate government decision-making during pandemics23. Recent developments: Establishment of an Australian CDC An ACDC is being established by the Department of Health and Aged Care (DHAC) to improve Australia's response and preparedness for public health emergencies. It will ensure pandemic preparedness, lead national responses to health emergencies, and facilitate prevention and control of non-communicable and communicable diseases. DHAC is working with governments, health and aged care stakeholders, academics, researchers, and international counterparts. The 2023-24 May Budget allocated $90.9m to establish an interim ACDC within DHAC led by the CMO from 1 January 2024. The funding will assist in finalising ACDC functions. It will support establishment of a standalone ACDC, passage of legislation and consultation24. The interim ACDC will initially focus on pandemic preparedness and preventing communicable diseases. It will provide national leadership in prevention across communicable and non-communicable diseases. A phased approach will establish the ACDC, with further work in 2023 on a standalone ACDC. The October 2022-23 Budget allocated $3.2m to establish the ACDC25. Stakeholders explored roles during 2022, culminating in a CDC stakeholder consultation report26 to advise government on the scope and functions of an ACDC. It was developed in response to the DHAC consultation paper which states that “While the CDC will be part of the Australian Government in some form, no other firm decisions have been made relating to its structure or governance'"27 (pg 6). There is currently an excellent opportunity to consider implementation options for APHHA and its relationship with an ACDC. Recommendations: Recommendation 1: That you consider my submission to the Senate Select Committee on COVID-19, including its recommendations, to establish an APHPA and ACDC to enable the Government to marshal resources in a cost-effective and co-ordinated manner, mobilizing a whole-of-society and whole-of-economy effort during health crises. Recommendation 2: That you consider my journal article concerning ‘The economics of the COVID-19 pandemic: economic evaluation of government mitigation and suppression policies, health system innovations, and models of care’. Commonwealth and State governments can use the economic evaluation techniques analysed in the article to better target responses to the needs of particular populations during future pandemics. This information updates my recommendations to the Senate Select Committee on COVID-19 with methodologies that can be utilized by the APHPA and ACDC to achieve the outcomes identified in foregoing recommendation 1 . Recommendation 3: The APHPA and ACDC be implemented to enable a One Health, ‘all hazards’ approach for communicable and non-communicable diseases with data linkage, nationally consistent analysis, advice, data security, guidelines, and an adequate National Medical Stockpile. I trust this information will assist you to make recommendations to improve response measures in future pandemics. They embrace a whole-of-govemment view in recognition of the wide-ranging impacts of COVID-19 across portfolios and the community. I would welcome the opportunity to participate in stakeholder meetings during 2024. Kind Regards, 23 ibid 24 https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/Australian-CDC 25 ibid 26 https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-03/centre-for-disease-control-stakeholder-consultation-report.pdf 27 https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2022/ll/role-and-functions-of-an-australian-centre-for-disease-control_0.pdf pg 6 4 Dr Kathryn Antioch GAICD, PhD (Health Economics), MSc, BA (Hons) AFCHSM, CHM Chief Executive Officer, Guidelines and Economists Network International (GENI) Principal Management Consultant, Health Economics and Funding Reforms Adjunct Senior Lecturer, DEPM School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine Monash University Adjunct Instructor, Department of Pharmacotherapy, College of Pharmacy, University of Utah, USA http://geni-econ.org phone | 19 November 2023 5 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0032 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0033 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0033.pdf I am Graham Nicol, a CPA and Real Estate and Business Agent, and sole director of Beach Stays Australia Pty Ltd, trading as Executive Escapes in Western Australia. Executive Escapes manages a portfolio of properties for owners engaged in supplying accommodation to primarily the tourist market. At the commencement of measures to contain covid in March 2020, movement of people was severely restricted, causing mass cancellations of accommodation bookings for the foreseeable future. The business was only sustainable because of the 'Jobkeeper' programme put promptly in place by the Federal Government. Executive Escapes was able to continue to provide services to primarily those travellers who were not able to return to their homes interstate or overseas, and a source of income to staff, contractors and property owners. The Jobkeeper programme ceased at end of March 2021, and was replaced by a Commonwealth backed loan offer-the SME Recovery Loan Scheme. Two early iterations, Phase 1 and 2, were replaced by Phase 3 which included some modifications to address some difficulties faced by applicants for those Schemes. The Schemes were intended to provide means for previously viable businesses which were financially impacted by the covid restrictions, to survive the continuing impact of the lockdowns to be able to emerge eventually with resources to return them to robust health. The scope of the loans was wide, allowing replenishment of working capital, renegotiation/replacement of existing loans, and expansion of business operations repayable over a period of up to ten years at low interest. Loan applications were to be made through participating banks and subject to their normal sustainability measures. The Commonwealth guaranteed the repayment of the loans to the extent of 80% initially, later reduced to 50%. Refer https://treasury.gov.au/coronavirus/sme-recovery-loan- scheme Faced with a continuation of the strict lockdown measures for an indefinite period, of course many affected businesses at this time would be attracted to this offer to avoid closure and financial hardship/loss of capital due to otherwise unsustainable continuing loss of sufficient income. It would be expected of the Government officials who were planning and implementing the Scheme (Treasury) to be aware of their responsibility to provide a practical lifeline to sustainable businesses, providing guidance through consultancy, and clarifying the sustainability process, to allow business operators to properly assess their chances of a successful loan application. They would have been aware of the time needed to assemble loan applications, including negotiation of existing loan agreements repayment, determining working capital requirements, negotiating business acquisitions, preparing financial statements, consolidations and forecasts, and the cost of continuing losses whilst the assembly of the loan application was in preparation. That Treasury did not fulfil its obligations is the argument here. Although I cannot speak for others, and curiously there has been no opportunity made to date for a forum in which to share experiences, I can recount mine in this matter: • Negotiation, compilation and presentation process was completed in six months, including ATO, private lender, 2 purchases of similar businesses, financial modelling and sustainability checks • 2 months presenting and discussing with 4 banks, all who rejected the application. Disclosure by one bank manager (only) of the additional sustainability requirements imposed on these loans: o Tax debt cannot be included o When looking at previous year business performance, all Jobkeeper payments excluded o Previous year's financial situation excluded, and future contributions excluded from bottom line. In essence only existing operations included in serviceability calculations Resulting in an obvious failure in serviceability even before any stress testing. It is my contention, as a professional accountant with many years of presentation of loan applications to banks, that all the serviceability criteria would have been sought by responsible Treasury officials and communicated to intending applicants to allow them to fully assess the situation and possible losses before proceeding. Failure to do so for most professionals would result in probable litigation under the various consumer protection laws • Losses to that date of working capital and an indebtedness to the ATO of in unpaid PAYG and GST • On advice from the ATO, I prepared a CDDA (Claim for Damages from Defective Administration) and presented it to Treasury, claiming the approx. S^^^Hdamages • 8 months later, Treasury refused the claim • An appeal to the Commonwealth Ombudsman is still awaiting allocation of an officer to investigate the matter after 4 months. Meanwhile, the cost of the decision to continue in business back in April 2021 is mounting, even though business is slowly returning to normal. At present the only beneficiaries of a forced sale will be the business's creditors. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0033 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0034 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0034.pdf Commonwealth Government Covid-19 Response Inquiry - Submission Terms of Reference topics/responses: • Governance including the role of the Commonwealth Government, responsibilities of state and territory governments, national governance mechanisms (such as National Cabinet, the National Coordination Mechanism and the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee) and advisory bodies supporting responses to COVID-19. I found the Commonwealth Governments' response to COVID-19 to be highly appropriate, given the information that was available at the time. The prompt closure of our international borders prevented the widescale spread of COVID that other countries had experienced. The Government clearly communicated to those already overseas to come home and they provided a deadline to do so. This was clear and concise information and could not have been handled better. • Key health response measures (for example across COVID-19 vaccinations and treatments, key medical supplies such as personal protective equipment, quarantine facilities, and public health messaging). Vaccinations: I found the rollout of vaccinations to be appropriate, given the information available at the time. I felt that the relevant government agencies ensured that vaccinations were safe (as much as we could know at that time) and Australia took heed of mistakes that other countries had made. The only problem with vaccinations (at least for the first rollout) was that communication provided by the Commonwealth and State Governments was not consistent and was confusing. It wasn't clear who could get what vaccine and where. The Dept of Health website sent you to State Gov websites who sent you back to the Dept of Health website. It was only when I called my GP that I got information that was useful to me. PPE: Given the immediate danger of the first strain of COVID, I thought that health providers were adeguately and appropriately provided with PPE. Masks were easily available for consumers, and so was information on how to wear them. Despite that fact that there is conflicting information on their efficacy, I believe they provided comfort for people, especially those who are vulnerable. I personally believe they provided some protection against COVID. Quarantine facilities: the availability of quarantine facilities was appropriate initially, however the state run quarantine costs and processes were appalling. forced into quarantine in Brisbane with no healthcare provided. The cost was ridiculous. I felt it was a breach of human rights to force innocent people into quarantine, not provide sufficient healthcare or hospitality services, and then charge them for it. Her dinner was dropped outside the hotel door on the floor but she could not bend over to pick it up. She was provided with clean sheets but did not have the strength to change them so she had to sleep in dirty sheets the whole time. The Human Rights Commission should have intervened but they let this happen. Complaints to them and to state governments fell on deaf ears. This was not acceptable. Public health messaging: I felt that communication by Governments was appropriate. The daily press conferences were very useful and gave us up to date information. PCR testing: I thought that the PCR testing sites provided were extremely useful. Results were guick to be provided. This was an excellent initiative. • Broader health supports for people impacted by COVID-19 and/or lockdowns (for example mental health and suicide prevention supports, and access to screening and other preventive health measures). Mental health was neglected by all levels of government, particularly in the areas that were locked down for significant periods of time. Other health services were also neglected. People could not see their doctor. I understand that for minor health services this was acceptable, but not for more serious illnesses and for people with chronic health conditions. There will be long term conseguences of this neglect as people with illnesses will have not been treated appropriately and so their condition will (or already has) worsened. • International policies to support Australians at home and abroad (including with regard to international border closures, and securing vaccine supply deals with international partners for domestic use in Australia). Australians abroad: as above, I believe that closing borders and providing emergency flights for those overseas was appropriate. However many people who did not heed those warnings still expected the government to get them home. Perhaps there could be additional warnings for travellers (on DFAT or similar services?) advising them that you visit other countries at your own risk. The government can't be responsible for bailing people out all the time. This was a unigue issue, and was an extreme event and so unexpected by most people. But the department of Health knew that a pandemic was overdue so could have pre-empted it happening and provided information on what travellers should do if the event occurred. Securing vaccine supplies: I felt that the commonwealth government did a good job to secure vaccines. When appropriate, the brands of vaccines were changed, and age-appropriate vaccines were provided. Given the information available to the government at the time, I don't think they could have done anything differently. • Financial support for individuals (including income support payments). The JobKeeper program was excellent. It was innovative and helped individuals to secure financial support. It also supported businesses as they were able to adapt their workforce according to the ever-changing rules. • Governance including the role of the Commonwealth Government, responsibilities of state and territory governments, national governance mechanisms (such as National Cabinet, the National Coordination Mechanism and the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee) and advisory bodies supporting responses to COVID-19. My main concern with COVID-19 governance was the way that the commonwealth had no oversight on how the states responded. I understand that under normal circumstances the states can control their territories however when a national disaster like this occurs, the commonwealth government should be provided with the rights to oversee all state decisions. The Queensland government did not care one iota about human rights, nor did the Victorian Government. The border closures between states were inhumane, and more akin to a Berlin Wall scenario. This is not acceptable. The state governments did not concur on decisions, the commonwealth was unable to intervene and the people of Australia suffered. The NSW Government was one of the few governments that provided realistic and appropriate rules for the NSW population. They also cared deeply for the people of other states which cannot be said for the other premiers. We are all Australians yet this lack of co-operation between state governments caused us to be divided. It was cruel. Many of the state premiers thought of only themselves and their popularity. Next time there's a pandemic (or similar national disaster) the commonwealth government should take over and make border decisions and ensure that all state premiers work together for the safety of the nation. The National Cabinet was rendered useless as there was little agreement or consensus on decisions. This was a time to forget politics and focus on the wellbeing of Australians but that did not occur. The confusion around vaccine information (as mentioned earlier) could also have been avoided if there was commonwealth oversight over vaccines and information. There should've been ONE website providing information, from the Dept of Health. All state websites should have directed them back to the DoH website. • Broader health supports for people impacted by COVID-19 and/or lockdowns (for example mental health and suicide prevention supports, and access to screening and other preventive health measures). Lockdowns: Lockdowns were necessary, however some of them were ridiculously over-strict. In particular the Victorian government lockdowns were inhumane and people were treated like criminals. I personally knew people that were suffering as a result of this, and some are still scarred by the experience. Once again, where were the Human Rights Commission? ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0034 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0035 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0035.pdf Ken Bairstow • We make annual trips to the UK, and stay for a period of 5 months in family accommodation. • In early February 2020 commenced our annual visit. • Our return flight with Qantas was scheduled for June 2020. This was cancelled in May 2020. • Researched available flight carriers into Western Australia. • Advised by family that we would need permission to return to Western Australia via a G2G pass. • Applied, were rejected then eventually accepted with supporting information that we had an empty home to return to and quarantine in, supported by local family. • Obtained clear Negative Covid test Results prior to departure from UK. Terms of reference - Health and non health responses Responsibilities of the Commonwealth and the role of the state and territory governments On our arrival at the Perth Airport our Negative Covid Test results were dismissed as unimportant. Our printed G2G pass stating that our quarantine address was our home address was dismissed. We were forced into hotel quarantine for 14 days. We had to have 2 Covid tests in that period and were denied the results. We were negative. The room was unclean. We had no opening windows or access to fresh air. We had no change of linen for 14 days. Family supplied us with food. We were treated as criminals and demonised. We have emotional damage, sleep problems, a lack of trust and permanent mental anguish. Suggested future Government responses based upon our experience:- • Ensure that all Australian citizens who are overseas and wish to return home are able to do so rather than blocking this by way of cancelled flights, restricted flights and costly flights. • Acknowledge that returning Australian citizens who can prove their current health situation are acknowledged, by having trained medical staff at the airport. • Quarantine should only be for those citizens who are infected and or contagious. • Quarantine facilities must be fit for purpose, clean rooms, clean linen access to fresh air and quality food. • Quarantine services are to be a Commonwealth responsibility and all costs covered by them. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0035 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0036 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0036.pdf Public submission and supporting evidence (to inform recommendations that aim to improve Australia's preparedness for future pandemics) to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry Australian Government Dr Lambertus de Graaf, CEO, Geologist Mr Alan Smith, Major Projects Director and Building Practitioner, Qld Mr Michael Makeham, Qld Registered Architect November 2023_v2_abridged version "...Queenslanders! If you have a sniffle, a cough or a cold...go straight to the Emergency Department and get tested..." Queensland Govt. Chief Medical Officer - COVID-19 Media Campaign 2020-2022 Published references accessed for this submission • COVID Mortality in Australia- COVID 19 Deaths that Occurred by 31 Oct 2021, ABS • COVID Mortality in Australia- COVID 19 Deaths registered until 30 September 2023, ABS • Centre for Population analysis of Provisional Mortality Statistics and Excess Mortality during the COVID-19 Pandemic, 30 March 2022 • 'Statement on the Doherty Institute modelling' Doherty Institute, Vic. 23 August 2021 • Actuaries Institute's COVID-19 Mortality Working Group- 'Latest Analysis of Excess deaths'. January 2023 • Our World in Data.org/coronavirus, 10 November 2023 • World Health Organisation COVID 19 Dashboard, November 2023 Submitter's contact: Part A - Public trust in vaccine efficacy flatlined globally once most State compulsion was unwound at the end of 2021. The impact of State pandemic coercion and overreach is still playing out. Record Excess deaths in 2023 remain unexplained c;ovio-i^ vaccine boosters administered per 100 people Our World in Data Total number of vaccine booster doses administered, divided by the total population of the country. Booster doses are doses administered beyond those prescribed by the original vaccination protocol. 140 Chile 120 100 Italy 80 Singapore 60 United States 40 Bangladesh World Pakistan 20 India Russia Sep 8. 2021 Mar 31. 2022 Oct 17. 2022 May 5. 2023 Nov 10. 2023 Data source: Official data collated by Our World in Data - Last updated 12 November 2023 OurWoridlnData.org,'coronavirus | CC BY Pa rt A- Post pandemic Excess mortality exceeds the pandemic period. Excess deaths in Australia since mid 2022 appears to be uncorrelated with the first three waves of COVID-19 variant infection. The Australian Government has yet to provide a cogent explanation of why . Excess deaths since Q2 2022 must be explained Excess mortality: Deaths from all causes compared to average over previous years Our World in Data The percentage difference between the reported number of weekly or monthly deaths in 2020-2023 and the average number of deaths in the same period over the years 2015-2019. The reported number might not count all deaths that occurred due to incomplete coverage and delays in reporting. 30% 20% 10% Australia 0% Jan 5, 2020 Feb 24, 2021 Sep 12, 2021 Mar 31, 2022 Oct 17, 2022 Jul 30, 2023 Data source: Human Mortality Database (2023); World Mortality Dataset (2023) OurWorldlnData.org/coronavirus | CC BY Part A- Many pandemic disease predictions and interventions recommended by public health officers and research epidemiologists proved to be wrong and/or excessive. Multiple public health agencies operating within the Federation competed to issue 'worst case' disease forecasting .This transmitted fear but wasn't effective. • Australians experienced a multitude of Health Directives and Daily Updates issued by State and Commonwealth Chief Health Officers (and their political masters) from early 2020 onwards as being questionable, contradictory and some panic-laden . Many forecasts announced were proven wrong • Media briefings by Health Ministers and Premiers citing necessary "actions' taken "...out of an abundance of caution..." were seen as 'code' for more State directives and further harm to social and economic wellbeing • Australians saw that WHO, (USA)CDC, Commonwealth of Australia and State pandemic planning and health emergency protocols were ditched or overridden by (at times) shrill 'public health emergency' fear campaigns followed by the exercise of the coercive powers of the State under the guise of public safety, law and order • Australians endured zealous over-reach by politicians and senior public servants shielded by (still secret) public health advice and disease modelling by Doherty, Burnett and others. That modelling has since been shown to have been flawed or algorithmically biased to predict serious mass disease and hospital overload Part A- The pandemic response proved that National Cabinet is 'gamed' by State politicians motivated by the potent messaging opportunities thrown up by a public health 'crisis'. Federated governance incentivises partisan action by State politicians who see opportunity to extend their time in public office • Public belief in the competence and evidence base of epidemic management by senior Public Health bureaucrats has, in our opinion, been impaired. Does this matter? Probably not. • Voluntary vaccine uptake will occur where believed to be safe and effective, where the pathological threat is demonstrably real and where politicians and health officials curb their instincts to flex coercive State powers. • National cabinet was gamed into a masterful political 'hit job' on the then Prime Minister and Government of the day. Some State Premiers acted in concert to sabotage the practical usefulness of the National Cabinet. • Subversion of National Cabinet by the Premiers was contrary to the interests of the nation but proved to be sound State politics. Prudent preparedness planning should recognise the instincts and motives of State Premiers. Part A- Submitter's observations and conclusions on the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia 2020-2022 and implications for preparedness for future pandemics • National cabinet- had no significant effect on the progression of the virus and was perversely dysfunctional • COVID lethality- the Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) in the general population) globally) was between 0.1% to 0.5% in most countries. Comparable to an influenza pandemic. There is no proven basis for economies to be mothballed • Age profile- the median age of COVID deaths is over 80 years - 50% occurring in Nursing Homes • Vaccine protection- the experimental vaccines did not prevent infection and transmission. Prior infection conferred more durable immunity • Vaccine injuries- the benefit- risk ratio of mRNA vaccination of children and healthy adults is likely negative • Excess mortality- Australia has since mid 2022, experienced greater Excess death than during the pandemic years. • Symptoms- obesity was a major risk factor but overall, 95% of all people developed only mild or moderate COVID infection symptoms • Treatment- numerous studies showed that early outpatient treatment reduced hospitalization and death • Transmission- pre-symptomatic transmission may account for up to 50% of all COVID infections • Masks- masks had no influence on infection rates. This was well established before the pandemic Part A- Submitter's observations and conclusions on the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia 2020-2023 • Lockdowns- lockdowns had no significant effect on the pandemic but had significant impact on society • Children- unlike Influenza- the risk of severe COVID disease in children is very low • Schools- the closure of schools had no effect on infection rates in the general population • PCR testing- PCR and antigen mass testing had no effect on infection rates in the general population • Contact tracing- manual contact tracing and tracing apps had no effect on infection rates. WHO recommended against contact tracing in 2019 • Vaccine passports- vaccine passports had no effect on infection rates as vaccination didn't prevent infection • Virus mutations- coronaviruses mutate frequently. Oricon is highly infectious but 80% less lethal than the synthetic Wuhan strain • Sweden- COVID mortality without lockdowns was comparable to a strong influenza season .Median age of COVID related deaths in Sweden was 84 years • Influenza- Deaths attributed to Influenza viruses largely disappeared during the COVID 19 pandemic period • Media- much media commentary and prediction promoted a massive overestimation of COVID lethality • Virus origin - genetic evidence indicates that the Wuhan strain was a synthetic virus and that infective illness was a form of toxic reaction to a laboratory manufactured bio- weapon. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0036 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0037 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0037.pdf COVID-19 RESPONSE SUBMISSION November 2023 Risk Management Dr Coatsworth, who was Deputy Chief Medical Officer from 23 January 2021 and as such was a senior health advisor to the Australian government, advocated in an article in the Australian Financial Review on 7 September 2023 that "excess deaths" caused by COVID-19 are an acceptable tradeoff for better economic performance. I strongly disagree with this approach, which is at odds with risk management in other aspects of our society. I have spent a career in hazardous industrial chemicals, where we design and operate facilities where one safety standard is a risk to an individual in the general community of less than 1 death per a million years. Overseas, the nuclear power industry operates under similar regulations. I cannot believe that Coatsworth could advocate for one risk standard for COVID while society demands an entirely different standard for other activities. Perhaps medical training, while aimed at medical aspects at an individual level, does not provide an acceptable basis for community-wide risk management. To expand this beyond COVID, where for a long time the death toll was at least 10 times the road toll, we have a comprehensive set of vehicle and road design standards which address many safety risks with the objective of increasing safety. Examples include the wearing of seat belts, use of airbags and provision of crash barriers. I have never heard it suggested that we lower our standards in order to benefit the overall economy while accepting increased road deaths. The industrial chemicals sector uses very detailed statistical analysis of situations and equipment to determine the most economic means of reducing risk to the community. I strongly recommend a similar approach to identify options to minimise risks resulting from pandemics. I would expect such an approach to recommend adopting technology solutions such as: • better ventilation of public buildings, hospitals, schools and public transport • use of HEPA filters, particularly where large numbers of people are present • air quality monitoring in real time • the wearing of masks in some situations Surely such an approach is better than not addressing the more obvious causes of COVID transmission and blindly accepting a higher death toll. COVID is still with us and will surely come again in a different form. These measures should be implemented now to reduce the risk of infection and the ongoing costs of long COVID at both the individual level, to the health system and to the economy generally. Richard Paterson FIChemE ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0037 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0038 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0038.pdf (Individual) submission to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry Professor James McCaw Head, Infectious Disease Dynamics Unit, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health and School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne. Background I am a internationally recognised authority on infectious disease dynamics and pandemic planning and response, and sit on numerous WHO pandemic planning and response, and viral respiratory surveillance working groups. During the COVID-19 pandemic, I sat on Australia’s highest level health committee, the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee as one of three invited experts. Ongoing at time of submission, I co-lead a team that has delivered >200 high-impact ‘situational assessment’ reports to the Commonwealth and jurisdictional governments during COVID-19, directly shaping national and jurisdictional decisions. At the time of submission, their detailed content is not public, although the content is described in Australia’s National Surveillance Plan for COVID-19 (various versions) and limited material has been made public through the release of technical reports and a number of peer-reviewed publications. In addition to this work, in January-April 2020 with briefed the National Security Committee and National Cabinet on response options to COVID-19 including, but not limited to, international border closures, testing policy, isolation and quarantine, social distancing policies, and Tockdown’ strategies. In 2021 we co-led a national consortium delivering scientific advice on vaccination prioritisation and threshold coverage levels to support Australia’s National Reopening Plan for COVID-19. Multiple reports were delivered to PM&C, Health, and National Cabinet, and have been made public via the Doherty Institute’s website. Summary In this personal submission, I make a number of observations on how data, surveillance, modelling and analytics supported the Australian COVID-19 response, and where I believe there is scope for improvement and/or risks for future capability. These views do not necessarily represent those of my colleagues, nor my employer (University of Melbourne). My submission focuses primarily on how data, epidemic analytics and scientific evidence contributed to topics covered by the inquiries Terms of Reference points on: governance; key health response measures; international policies; and mechanisms to better target future responses. Scenario modelling to support strategic response Australia has world-leading capabilities in infectious diseases data analytics and modelling to support pandemic planning and response. These capabilities were drawn upon to great effect in the first few months of the pandemic (January-April 2020), when AHPPC recruited me, Cheng to attend AHPPC as expert advisers (we retained these roles until approximately mid 2022). Rapid analyses of the emerging data from China, sourced through my and ^^^^^^^ntemational networks and membership of a rapidly convened WHO (Geneva) global working group (from 16th January 2020), supported early advice to the Commonwealth on the need for urgent action, and critically, the scientific evidence to support the view that early action could dramatically ameliorate the anticipated health and societal impacts of the pandemic. Public facing evidence for these observations is available in press conferences delivered by the Prime Minister and CMO in March 2020, and an associated peer-reviewed study (Moss et al, EID 26(12): 2844 2020). Then in 2021, a national consortium convened and McCaw delivered what has become known as the ‘Doherty Modelling’ to government to help shape the National Reopening Plan (put in place prior to the emergence of the Omicron variant(s) of SARS-CoV-2). Despite strengths of this work and its positive and influential role in decision making, there are a number of concems/weaknesses and associated recommendations. Concern 1: Scientific research was not made available to the public in a timely manner, and release was subject to government (andperhaps political) oversight. This strongly contrasts with practices in the UK and New Zealand (and elsewhere no doubt) where the scientific analyses were made public in a timely manner. Recommendation 1: The scientific evidence delivered to government should be made public prior to or at the time of the public announcement ofpolicy responses based on that scientific evidence. Note: I am not making a comment on, nor recommendation about whether deliberations on the nature of that evidence (at meetings such as AHPPC and National Cabinet) should be made public as they are distinctfrom the scientific research itself. Concern 2: In 2021, the Commonwealth only resourced a single team (albeit a large national consortium which I co-led) to provide model-based advice on the National Reopening strategy. This contrasts with, for example, best practice from the UK, where a mechanism was in place (through SPI-M) for multiple independent teams to conduct analyses that were then fed into a system to identify consensus and/or highlight points of highest uncertainty, in order to best advise government. Given the enormous scientific uncertainty, high-stakes outcomes, and established precedent for multi-team contributions to advise government, our national approach to have in essence a single point-of-contact with modelling was (in principle) a serious limitation. Note: I do not believe any of the actual decisions made by the government of the day were adversely impacted, but the limitation, and so concern, nonetheless remains. Recommendation 2: Australia establish a mechanism - including suitably expanded investment in core scientific capability and training - to ensure that in a future pandemic modelling-based advice is delivered through a multi-team approach. The establishment of “scenario hubs ” in the US and Europe, and the funding to support them, presents one modelfor how this might work in Australia. Situational assessment, epidemic analytics and surveillance In parallel to the scenario-based research conducted periodically to support major strategic decisions, Australia also benefited from high-frequency (weekly) analyses of myriad surveillance data. These analyses were conducted by the team co-led by me and ^^^^^^^^^Rongoing at time of submission), and are documented in Australia’s National Surveillance Plan for COVID-19 (versions from 2021 through 2023). Concern 3: Reports - providing the most data-informed estimates of key quantities such as the effective reproduction number, Transmission Potential, behavioural trends, and case and hospitalforecasts - were not made public (in any routine sense, noting a number of technical reports were released (see the IDDU CEB UoM website) over the course of the pandemic). In their absence, analyses andfindings conducted based on publicly available data and often by people/teams without appropriate scientific expertise in epidemic analytics and modelling, were the primary public source of information on the status of the pandemic in Australia. As an expert in the area (with a high-profile media presence), and with detailed knowledge of the actual status of the pandemic, Iwas regularly unable to describe the status of the pandemic, norfully counter misconceptions or misunderstandings of the status of the pandemic presented in the media. Recommendation 3: Australia provide real-time public reporting of all metrics and indicators described in its National Surveillance plan(s). Note: additional interpretive advice provided by experts (either those who conducted the analyses or third parties) based on those metrics and indicators may not necessarily be made public. Concern 4: Jurisdictions were and remain the primary holder of the critical surveillance data used to inform situational assessment, yet the Commonwealth funded and coordinated the analyses (noting that some jurisdictions also worked directly with epidemiological experts and teams to provide in-jurisdiction advice). Given the restrictions on data sharing between jurisdictions and the Commonwealth, this resulted in a degraded non-optimal data set being provided to the national situational assessment consortium. Recommendation 4: Data sharing and governance protocols are reviewed to ensure the contracted analytical teams are provided with the most detailed and accurate data to support national andjurisdictional responses. Furthermore, more fine-grained (but privacy-protecting) data should be made public to support independent scientific analyses and to feed back to the global community for public good. Concern 5: Surveillance data is collectedfor multiple purposes: both front-line ‘immediate’ or operational responses (e.g. case interviews are conducted to support quarantine and isolation requirements) and high- level ‘strategic ’responses (e.g. decisions on whether or not quarantine and isolation policies should be imposed (or relaxed), or whether or not ‘lockdown’ restrictions should be imposed (or relaxed)). However, traditionally, it is only the frontline/operational’response considerations that determine what data is and is not collected through surveillance systems. At multiple times during the pandemic this led to decisions being made to cease collection of critical data (based on (reasonable) changing operational requirements) at the very time that those exact same data were required to deliver requested strategic advice to (the same) govemment(s). The inter-dependencies were unappreciated (even when explained ahead of time to those responsible), and the consequences of decisions made at an operational level were often not understood. This is a globally recognised challenge, and WHO (Geneva) has convened a number of working groups to explore this, to which Australian experts (including me and Dr Freya Shearer) are taking a leading role). Recommendation 5: Australian surveillance planning - noting its dual purpose to support both ‘operational’ and ‘strategic’objectives - undergoes a deep root-and-branch review. This requires a dramatic change in mindset, and likely change in training pathways for public health professionals, public servants and epidemiologists responsible for designing, overseeing and maintaining surveillance systems. Concern 6: Since the end of the pandemic, Australia’s surveillance systems for viral respiratory infections have largely returned to a ‘pre-pandemic’ status, rather than adjusting to adopt strategies and advances made during CO VID-19. Those public health officials and scientists most involved in designing Australia’s COVID-19 surveillance systems have not been sufficiently engaged (if engaged at all) in the design ofpost­ pandemic surveillance (through the ACDCplanning or otherwise). The major (global and national) advances that were made during the COVID-19 response are at genuine risk of being lost in Australia. This is in contrast to elsewhere. For example the US CDC has invested >$200M in a major forecasting hub’to take forward advances from COVID-19 data analytics andforecasting into routine viral respiratory surveillance (influenza, RSV, SARS-CoV-2), supporting routine health surveillance and ensuring preparedness for the (inevitable) next pandemic. ECDC launched a similar initiative in November 2023. And the WHO have convened a number of international working groups to review ongoing viral respiratory surveillance systems andfunctioning. Recommendation 6: Australian government(s) directly engage with national experts in epidemic analytics and surveillance to ensure post-pandemic systems are fit-for-purpose and have adopted state-of-the-art approaches that have proven to be of value (and be efficient) during COVID-19. A final note on the role of the mathematical sciences, and addressing a major misconception Artificial intelligence and machine learning were not a major factor in the national (or global) response to COVID-19 (but do have their place of course). While modelling and data analytics played a major role in the COVID-19 response (as described above), the core disciplines that supported this were: non-linear dynamical systems analysis (that is, “mathematical modelling”) and state-of-the-art biostatistical and epidemiological analyses. Artificial intelligence (AI) and techniques such as machine learning played only a minor (but still valuable) role. This is of no surprise to those with expertise in epidemiology and the mathematical sciences as AI, as impactful as it is in general society, is not (yet?) well suited to the challenges faced by governments when making strategic decisions on how to respond to a pandemic (because we are often dealing with unknowns and one-off events, and so the large volumes of data from which AI techniques primarily deliver their value do not exist). Any future expansion of scientific capability should reflect this. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0038 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0039 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0039.pdf ■C sh a SHPA response to Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry, November 2 I23 The Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia (SHPA) is the national, professional organisation for the 6,100+ Hospital Pharmacists, and their Hospital Pharmacist Intern and Hospital Pharmacy Technician colleagues working across Australia's health system, advocating for their pivotal role improving the safety and quality of medicines use. Embedded in multidisciplinary medical teams and equipped with exceptional medicines management expertise, SHPA members are progressive advocates for clinical excellence, committed to evidence-based practice and passionate about patient care. SHPA welcomes the opportunity to respond to the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry. As the peak body representing hospital pharmacists in Australia, SHPA and its members are proud to have played a significant role in responding to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Australian healthcare system. SHPA was proud to be the only pharmacy organisation represented on the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce and believes that involving pharmacists in the implementation and development of clinical guidelines is critical to the appropriate clinical management of any future pandemic. Hospital pharmacists have played a critical role throughout COVID-19 pandemic, operating the logistics of, and making up vaccine doses for state-run mass vaccination clinics during 2021, and supplying and dispensing vital COVID antiviral treatments from the National Medical Stockpile for the prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19. The leadership of the Therapeutic Good Administration (TGA) during the global pandemic period has played a vital role in connecting stakeholders in areas of medicine supply, pharmacy, and healthcare, addressing traditional gaps in policy and regulatory cohesion. Despite this, the Australian Government's response to the pandemic also highlighted existing weaknesses in medicine supply and access. While early discourse around hospital capacity to support mass surges of intensive care unit (ICU) presentations were framed around the access to vital medical equipment such as ventilators, there was not commensurate discussion and alarm around all the essential medicines required to support people on ventilation, such as neuromuscular blockers and sedative agents for intubation of patients. These challenges faced by Australian hospitals were previously discussed in SHPA’s submission to Senate Inquiry into the Australian Government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic^ which would be relevant to this submission. These findings were supported by SHPA’s COVID-19 Hospital Pharmacy Capacity Snapshot Series report2 which lasted for five weeks between April - May 2020, when the entire world was experiencing or preparing for mass surges in intensive care hospital activity that had not been experienced before. The lessons learned for hospitals and other key stakeholders from navigating the COVID-19 pandemic will help improve Australia's preparedness for future pandemics and public emergencies. This submission will discuss factors that contribute to hospital preparedness and capacity to respond to public emergencies and the importance of effective information sharing in strengthening Australia's pandemic response. If you have any queries or would like to discuss our submission further, please do not hesitate to contact Jerry Yik, Head of Policy and Advocacy on ivik@shpa.orq.au . The Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia PO Box 1774 Collingwood Victoria 3066 Australia (03)9486 0177 | shpa.org.au | shpa@shpa.org.au | ABN: 54 004 553 806 Strengthening support for hospitals to drastically scale operations during pandemic response As captured by SHPA’s COVID-19 Hospital Pharmacy Capacity Snapshot Series, the single largest concern experienced by Directors of Pharmacy, Chief Pharmacists and SHPA members nationally was the immense difficulty experienced by hospital pharmacy departments to provide critical medicines for the anticipated surge of patients requiring ventilation in intensive care units.2 While the release of modelling and collaborative efforts between federal and state governments enabled Australian hospitals to rapidly increase the number of their ICU beds by 250%, consideration of medicines required to use these beds were unfortunately not prioritised. These medicines included, but were not limited to: ■ propofol - induction agent for intubation, sedative agent for ventilation ■ cisatracurium, atracurium, rocuronium, vecuronium, pancuronium - neuromuscular blockers to facilitate intubation and ventilation ■ midazolam, fentanyl - induction agents for intubation, sedative agents for ventilation Lack of transparent communication between medicines manufacturers and wholesalers and the jurisdictional governments or hospitals eventually led to unreasonable restrictions being placed on hospital orders to prevent ‘stockpiling’, with manufacturers determining supply based on ‘historic’ orders. In an evolving landscape of a global pandemic, it would be inappropriate to rely on historic orders to inform supply decisions. Furthermore, ‘stockpiling’, a terminology used to describe unnecessary compiling of resources, did not accurately describe the actions of hospitals seeking to obtain critical medicines necessary to treat patients in an anticipated volume requested by jurisdictional preparedness plans. The ability of hospitals to rapidly scale up and down operations in response to the dynamic nature of the pandemic remains a critical aspect of an effective healthcare system. SHPA recommends that the Australian Government utilise policy and regulation to ensure that Australia's medicines supply system is strengthened to reduce the chance that Australian hospitals are left at risk of undersupply of key medicines during a global pandemic. SHPA’s Pharmacy Forecast Australia 2021 report discusses potential policy frameworks which the Australian Government can pursue to strengthen Australia's medicines supply chain.3 The learnings from this experience also highlights the need for enhanced collaboration with relevant stakeholders to establish a centralised system for managing and distributing critical pharmaceutical supplies during emergencies. In this respect, SHPA welcomes the Australian Government's plans to establish the Australian Centre for Disease Control as part of improving a nationally coordinated response to public health emergencies.4 Looking forward, this establishment will support Australia's pandemic preparedness and operational response capacity, as well as improve governance arrangements across all levels of government. Ensuring hospital pharmacy representation in key committees involved in medicines use during pandemic response planning SHPA was pleased to be able to participate and provide valuable information to the Medicines Shortages Working Party (MSWP) convened by the TGA to discuss medicines shortages during the pandemic. While the MSWP comprised of representatives from the TGA, pharmacy associations, medical associations, and the pharmaceutical sector, a subset of this committee specifically formed to address the management of available stock did not involve pharmacy representation. This may have contributed to the implementation of a strategy which relied heavily on ‘historic’ supply and existing customer relationships with wholesalers. Greater understanding of hospital procurement through hospital pharmacy representation on this committee could have provided more useful insight into effective resource allocation and early identification of problems that may arise with a blanket policy of ‘part’ or ‘back-ordered supply'. Lack of pharmacist representation was also noted in key specialist committees advising on the use of vaccines such as the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) recommendations.5 This weakness was demonstrated by the early confusion of pharmacy stakeholders regarding what type of syringes or needles they required to draw up vaccines, to ensure that the entire vaccine dose could be delivered, and subsequently how to source these vaccine consumables as they were understandably highly sought after globally. The Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia PO B°x Collingwood Victoria 3066 Australia (03)9486 0177 | shpa.org.au | shpa@shpa.org.au | ABN: 54 004 553 806 SHPA recommends that during an emergency, any strategic restrictions of medicine supply are determined in collaboration with government and hospital representatives to avoid negative unintended consequences and that these restrictions are effectively communicated to all affected parties. This may also benefit from increased transparency of medicine stocks held in hospitals to enable smoother coordination of stock movement if required. Supporting the use of modelling to inform medicines supply requirements during pandemic response As COVID-19 cases began to ramp-up, disruptions to medicine supply chains and subsequent medicines shortages impacting access to critical and life-saving medicines required in ICUs led to panic across all hospitals in Australia. Hospital pharmacists across the nation took it upon themselves to identify essential medicines and develop modelling to indicate the minimum quantities necessary based on the government's projected COVID-19 cases, and to procure them. Whilst the modelling of medicines requirements in hospitals were addressed by the specialist skills of hospital pharmacists, this created an additional burden for individual hospital pharmacy departments who were already experiencing workforce pressures with the surge in COVID-19 cases impacting their staff and workload. The availability and continued revision of modelling of medicines during pandemic planning is crucial to ensuring adequate medicines access for ongoing treatments of patients. SHPA recommends that the Australian Government recognises the importance of modelling to inform medicines requirements and its workforce impacts during pandemic responses, and adequately support hospital pharmacy workforce capacity, who are vital to future pandemic planning. Improving transparency regarding the role of Australia's strategic medicine reserves Australia holds a National Medical Stockpile with a limited quantity of pharmaceuticals, vaccines, and antidotes for use during public health emergencies. During the pandemic, the lack of transparency regarding its existence, contents, and access requirements of this national resource limited hospitals in ensuring adequate medicines access, particularly those required to support ventilation of critically ill patients, and prevented effective resource allocation during the pandemic. Inconsistencies in the availability of information relating to jurisdictional medicine reserves were also present. While most Directors of Pharmacy participating in SHPA’s COVID-19 Hospital Pharmacy Capacity Snapshot Series report responded to being aware of the existence of jurisdictional medicine reserve by mid-May 2020, 57% of responders were not aware of the extent of this reserve and 75% were not confident that it would meet the demands in the event of their planned-for surge scenario.1 23 5 4 We need greater exchange of information and collaboration between governments responsible for health care, and improved leadership and governance to prepare Australian hospitals for future response to pandemics and public health crises. In future, it would be valuable if the Australian Government increased the information available regarding national and jurisdictional medicine reserves during non-pandemic periods so that protocols for access during pandemics are well understood. Attachments ■ SHPA submission to Senate Inquiry into the Australian Government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic ■ SHPA COVID-19 Hospital Pharmacy Capacity Snapshot Series References 1 The Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia. (2020). SHPA submission to senate inquiry into the Australian Government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Available at: https://prod.shpa.bond.software/publicassets/efff7c65-a187-ec11-90fc- 00505696223b/shpa submission to senate inquiry into the australian governments response to the COVID-19 pandemic.pdf 2 The Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia. (2020). COVID-19 Hospital Pharmacy Capacity Snapshot Series Final Report May 2020. Available at: https://shpa.orq.au/publicassets/6da941d0-de53-ec11-80dd-005056be03d0/shpa COVID19 hospital pharmacy capacity snapshot series final report may 2020.pdf 3 The Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia. (2021). Pharmacy forecast Australia 2021, June 2021. Available at: https://shpa.orq.au/publicassets/89ea30be-de53-ec11 - 80dd-005056be03d0/pharmacy forecast australia 2021.pdf 4 Department of Health and Aged Care. (2023). Australian Centre for Disease Control. Available at: https://www.health.qov.au/our-work/Australian- CDC#:~:text=Qn%20Fridav%2010%20November%202023,emerqencies%20with%20a%20health%20impact 5 The Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia. (2023). SHPA submissions to preparing for, and responding to, future pandemics and other international health emergencies. Available at: https://shpa.orq.au/publicassets/6d791 18a-5257-ee 11-912d-00505696223b/SHPA-submission-to-Preparinq-for-and-respondinq-to-future- pandemics-and-other-international-health-emerqencies.pdf The Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia PO Box 1774 Collingwood Victoria 3066 Australia (03)9486 0177 | shpa.org.au | shpa@shpa.org.au | ABN: 54 004 553 806 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0039 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0040 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0040.pdf I have lived in I, Western Australia, my whole life. I am a middle-aged single man with no children and have worked in a variety of industries, from retail to agriculture to manufacturing to warehousing. Anticipating the introduction of vaccine mandates, I sold my house in early 2021 and moved into a rental property. I was a keen gardener and used to keep finches, but have given up those hobbies, as I now live in a small unit. I considered moving interstate or overseas, but the response to Covid was much the same worldwide. I resigned from my job as a storeman in January 2022, when vaccine mandates came into force in Western Australia, and have not held a steady job since. The Western Australian and Commonwealth Governments' response to COVID-19 has greatly impacted my life. The COVID-19 Response Inquiry will be reviewing governance, including the role of the Commonwealth Government, responsibilities of state and territory governments, national governance mechanisms (such as National Cabinet, the National Coordination Mechanism and the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee) and advisory bodies supporting responses to COVID-19. I understand that it is not within the remit of this inquiry to review actions taken unilaterally by state and territory governments; however, I would argue that the Commonwealth Government was complicit in imposing lockdowns and vaccine mandates. Although states implemented lockdowns and vaccine mandates independently of one another, not one state unilaterally refused to implement them. National Cabinet — which includes the Prime Minister as a representative of the Commonwealth — was established to coordinate and deliver a consistent national response to the COVID-19 pandemic. On 13th March 2020, Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced, 'Commonwealth, State and Territory governments have agreed to provide public advice against holding non­ essential, organised public gatherings of more than 500 people ...' [emphasis mine]. This marked the beginning of escalating COVID measures, culminating in the introduction of Stage 1 restrictions, approved by National Cabinet and announced by the Prime Minister on 22nd March 2020, plunging the nation into lockdown. On 6th August 2021, National Cabinet agreed to the National Plan to transition Australia's National COVID-19 Response. Under this agreement, "highly targeted lockdowns" remained an option under phase three, which remained in effect until 6th July 2022. The Commonwealth Government was anxious to keep the deliberations of National Cabinet secret, introducing the COAG Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 to exempt National Cabinet documents from FOI requests. The Commonwealth Government demonstrated a pattern of evading scrutiny. Parliament was suspended from March until August of 2020, meaning that the Government could not be held accountable at a time when it was crucial to examine its decisions. Recent studies suggest that lockdowns were of minimal benefit and caused significant psychological and economic damage. There was never unanimity among scientists over lockdowns.were early critics. Based o | advice, Sweden refrained from locking down, instead relying on voluntary measures. 16,109 medical and public health scientists signed the Great Barrington Declaration, along with 47,658 medical practitioners. The evidence cited in favour of lockdowns was always questionable. The figures coming out of China, which showed cases plateauing at around 80,000 in early March, apparently as a result of its harsh lockdowns, should have been regarded with suspicion, especially given China's lack of transparency in the early stages of the pandemic. And in May 2020,shown to be based on flawed modelling. Yet lockdowns continued. National Cabinet and the AHPPC chose to listen to some scientists and to ignore others. The Government also refused to listen to laypeople who warned of the harms of lockdowns. Throughout the pandemic, I wrote to politicians at state and federal level on multiple occasions. I rarely received a reply, and when I did, it was usually a boilerplate response, reiterating familiar talking points. Because politicians wouldn't listen and protesting was illegal, many in the freedom movement took to social media, where they faced censorship. The Commonwealth Department of Home Affairs referred 4,213 COVID-19 related social media posts to digital platforms to review against their own terms of service, many of which were removed on the Department's recommendation. Many of the censored posts contained statements that were true. Others merely expressed an opinion. The Commonwealth suppressed inconvenient facts, denied Australians their right to express an opinion, and ensured that there would be nowhere for the public to debate COVID policy. The argument that the states unilaterally imposed lockdowns, mask mandates and vaccine mandates does not make sense if the Commonwealth actively censored criticism of state policies. Furthermore, lockdown opponents were relentlessly vilified in an attempt to demoralise and discredit them. They were labelled "misinformation spreaders". ACMA claimed that COVID-19 misinformation "can pose a risk to the health and safety of individuals, as well as society more generally ". ASIO claimed that the far-right was exploiting COVID-19 restrictions to promote its narratives and recruit new members. Senator Kristina Keneally repeated this claim, calling on the government to adequately fund programs to counter violent extremism. The Commonwealth- funded ABC and SBS published many articles portraying lockdown opponents as potentially violent extremists. In February 2023, ASIO chief Mike Burgess admitted that far-right groups had "probably not" been successful in recruiting significant numbers during the pandemic. This raises the question of whether there ever was a concerted effort from far-right groups to infiltrate anti-lockdown and anti-mandate groups. The claim never made sense. One would not expect anti-authoritarian groups to be fertile recruiting ground for authoritarian groups. I was a moderator of an anti-lockdown Facebook group with thousands of members, and I saw no sign of such activity. I believe the claim of far-right infiltration was propaganda, an attempt to establish guilt by association. Labelling someone "far-right" evokes the atrocities of World War II. "Far-right extremist" was probably the most objectionable label applied to lockdown opponents, but there were many others — "conspiracy theorist", "anti-science", "stupid", "selfish", etc. Knowingly or unknowingly, many politicians and Commonwealth agencies participated in character assassination, which took a personal toll on many lockdown opponents. In August 2020, Prime Minister Scott Morrison said he expected that COVID-19 vaccination would be "as mandatory as you can possibly make it", adding, "I was the minister that established 'No jab, no play', so my view on this is pretty clear." The Commonwealth purchased enough vaccines for every Australian to receive multiples doses and distributed them to the states. National Cabinet set high vaccination targets. The Commonwealth authorised the advertising slogan "We're not safe until we're all safe". The signalling was clear. The Commonwealth supported vaccine mandates for aged care workers, disability workers and those in high-risk situations in the health system. It provided the infrastructure for state vaccine mandates by requiring COVID-19 vaccinations to be registered with the AIR and issuing vaccination certificates. The Commonwealth also assisted other countries in enforcing vaccine mandates by providing International COVID-19 Vaccination Certificates. While they may no longer be in force, vaccine mandates have had a permanent impact on many peoples' lives. Vaccine mandates were a breach of the Nuremberg Code, which states: "The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion ..." COVID-19 vaccines do not prevent the contraction or transmission of COVID. There was never any evidence to support the latter claim. WHO data published in October 2020 suggested that the original strain of p rr di infection fatality rate of 0.27%. Vaccine mandates were neither reasonable nor proportionate, and the Commonwealth was complicit in imposing and enforcing them. I understand that this panel will look to submissions for ideas to make recommendations about how the Commonwealth responds to future pandemics. In any future crisis, the Commonwealth Government must be open to scrutiny. The Government's desire for secrecy damaged public trust. National Cabinet documents should be subject to FOI requests. Parliament should not be suspended during a crisis. Members can meet virtually if necessary. Reducing case numbers and preventing the health system from being overwhelmed seemed to be the only criteria policymakers considered. Any future pandemic response should not be based solely on epidemiological modelling but also consider the broader impact of proposed control measures. Politicians ought to question scientific advice and seek dissenting opinions before reaching an independent decision. During the pandemic, Australians were urged to exercise critical thinking and consider whether a source of information was reliable before repeating a claim. Politicians and Commonwealth employees should be held to the same standard. The truth was always out there. The bandwagon fallacy, appealing to a scientific consensus or to what other countries were doing, is neither a moral nor a rational justification. Following "the science" or "the latest health advice" does not absolve them of responsibility for implementing harmful policies. I often hear the excuse that they were acting on imperfect information but had good intentions. The zeal with which they maligned and scapegoated critics casts doubt on their intentions, as does their unwillingness to explain the reasons for their decisions. They must be held accountable, both professionally and legally. Laypeople, also acting on imperfect information and with good intentions, tried to warn them of the obvious disastrous consequences of their decisions. Policymakers have no excuse. Commonwealth decisionmakers must also consider whether state policies are ethical before offering support. The Commonwealth is morally obligated not to support unethical policies. The Commonwealth subsidised lockdowns through schemes such as JobKeeper and provided ADF personnel to enforce state lockdowns. The states could not have imposed such harsh lockdowns for so long without support from the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth should not provide financial support or resources for states to impose draconian restrictions. We must never see a repeat of 2020 in Australia. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0040 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0041 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0041.pdf AAPi AUSTRALIAN ASSOCIATION Of PSYCHOLOGISTS INC Dear Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, The Australian Association of Psychologists Incorporated (AAPi) are the leading not-for-profit peak body representing all psychologists. We have over 10,000 members and are committed to supporting the health and wellbeing of psychologists and Australians who need access to psychological support. Please see our comments provided below regarding the COVID-19 inquiry. 1. Key Health Response Measures a. COVID-19 Vaccinations and treatments The Australian Government has demonstrated commendable efforts in securing COVID-19 vaccines and treatments for the population, leading to high vaccination rates. However, public awareness campaigns should be sustained to encourage booster shots and overcome vaccine hesitancy, which many psychologists were required to work through with their clients. Many cross-cultural resources were not created or distributed in a timely enough fashion to combat much of this misinformation and disinformation. Psychologists, particularly health and community psychologists, can provide expertise in this area and should be adequately utilised. b. Medical supplies and personal protective equipment Ensuring a consistent supply of PPE to healthcare workers and essential services is vital. Transparency and collaboration with industry partners like the AAPi are key in managing these supplies effectively. During the pandemic, many psychologists were not allowed to access PHN-supplied PPE and, at times, were required to see highly vulnerable clients without access to PPE, leaving them at risk of contracting the virus and infecting clients. This led to significant distress that impacted their mental health. c. Public health messaging Public health messaging needs to be clear, consistent, and culturally sensitive to reach diverse populations effectively. Such messaging should emphasise the importance of accessing psychological support, vaccinations and preventive measures. Psychologists, particularly health and community psychologists, can provide expertise in this area and should be adequately utilised. AAPi were concerned that during the pandemic inadequate emphasis on the need to access mental health support was provided. Particularly during times of crisis, such as snap lockdowns, crisis support lines should have been prominently displayed along with the urging of people to reach out for support and the continuation of psychological treatment. Psychologists reported to us that it would have been beneficial if clients could refer themselves to psychologists, eliminating the significant bottleneck at GP clinics, which were overwhelmed during many periods of the pandemic. This would ensure, for future pandemics, that GPs could focus on physical health appointments, and www.aapi.org.au clients would not need to wait for weeks or months before AAPi AUSTRALIAN ASSOCIATION Of PSYCHOLOGISTS INC accessing support for their mental health. 2. Broader health supports a. Mental health and suicide prevention The mental health impact of the pandemic, particularly during lockdowns, has been significant. There is a pressing need to increase funding for mental health services, focusing on timely access to care and suicide prevention programs. The McKell report (2023) notes that investing in psychology services clients can access under Medicare would significantly ease this access issue. b. Access to screening and other health measures Ensuring uninterrupted access to essential health screenings and preventive mental health measures is vital. Psychology telehealth services should be promoted, especially in areas with lockdowns and regional areas in which residents often forgo or ration vital mental health support due to how inaccessible it currently is. 3. Support for Industry and Business b. Labor shortages There is a widely acknowledged psychology workforce shortage that shows no signs of easing. Meaningful strategies should be adopted to address labor shortages, including facilitating paid placements for student and provisional psychologists as well as allowing the 8,000 provisional psychologists in Australia to be able to work under the Medicare system, to support regional and rural psychologists to live and study in their home towns, to diversify psychology training and study pathways by reopening the 4+2 pathway, and workforce upskilling to meet industry demands. c. Housing and homelessness Investments in affordable housing and homeless support services should be prioritized, as without these basic measures, population mental health will be unable to shift towards greater mental health and wellbeing in any meaningful way (Singh et al., 2022). d. Family and domestic violence measures Efforts to combat family and domestic violence need to be comprehensive, providing support and refuge for survivors and also more funding and programs that work directly with perpetrators as there was a strong increase in domestic violence incidents between pre- and post-lockdown periods (Piquero et al., 2021) which continues to impact the health, safety, and wellbeing of all Australians impacted. 4. Mechanisms to better target future responses Future responses should consider the unique needs of various populations, including gender, age groups, socio-economic status, geographic location, people with disabilities, First Nations peoples, and culturally and linguistically diverse communities. The requirement to bulk bill for Telehealth at the start of the pandemic also became an issue as this put many businesses into financial difficulty as it meant a large income cut. Many businesses have struggled to remain financially viable since the pandemic, and as they are not eligible for government funding, are considering closing their doors. Turning your attention to the role of psychologists in the COVID-19 response, it is essential to acknowledge the extraordinary challenges they have faced. Throughout the pandemic, psychologists have been at the forefront of providing mental health support to Australians who have been grappling with the psychological toll of COVID-19 and lockdowns. www.aapi.org.au Psychology private practices, which often employ provisional psychologists, AAPi AUSTRALIAN ASSOCIATION Of PSYCHOLOGISTS INC faced significant difficulties in meeting the population's demands. One major issue was the inaccessibility of Medicare rebates for provisional psychologists, despite their equivalent training and qualifications to mental health social workers. This disparity created financial hardships for both provisional psychologists and the clients they served. Moreover, the two-tier psychology rebate system, which is not evidence-based, resulted in psychologists with clinical endorsement and other psychologists with similar qualifications rebated at vastly different levels. This discrepancy not only created financial challenges for psychologists but also left Australians in financial distress to make difficult choices when seeking mental health services. Workforce shortages in psychology services were a concern even before the COVID-19 pandemic, and the crisis further exacerbated this issue. There is an urgent need to expand pathways for provisional psychologists to gain full registration, especially in regional areas where the shortage of mental health professionals is more acute (McKell report, 2023). Many psychologists feel undervalued and unsupported by the government, which has contributed to a significant number leaving the profession. This attrition is counterproductive to the nation's mental health needs. For future pandemics or crises, it is imperative that we prioritise the well­ being, career development, and retention of psychologists in Australia. They are a crucial part of our healthcare system, and their expertise and support are essential during challenging times. The Australian government has shown commendable dedication to addressing the challenges posed by COVID-19. However, there is room for improvement in several key areas, particularly in supporting the mental health needs of the population and addressing the disparities within the psychology profession. By taking action in these areas, we can better prepare our healthcare system for future crises and ensure the well-being of both the public and the dedicated professionals who serve them. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I trust that the insights and recommendations provided in this response will contribute to a more resilient and responsive healthcare system in Australia. Warmest Regards Carly Dober Director and psychologists Australian Association of Psychologists www.aapi.org.au AAPi AUSTRALIAN ASSOCIATION Of PSYCHOLOGISTS INC References 1. Under Pressure: Australia’s Mental Health Emergency- The McKell Institute. (2023, February 14). The McKell Institute.https://mckellinstitute.org.au/research/reports/under-pressure- australias-mental-health-emergency/ 2. Chung, R. Y. N„ Chung, G. K. K., Gordon, D„ Mak, J. K. L, Zhang, L. F„ Chan, D„ ... & Wong, S. Y. S. (2020). Housing affordability effects on physical and mental health: household survey in a population with the world's greatest housing affordability stress. J Epidemiol Community Health, 74(2), 164-172. 3. Singh, A., Daniel, L, Baker, E., & Bentley, R. (2019). Housing disadvantage and poor mental health: a systematic review. American journal of preventive medicine, 57(2), 262-272. 4. Piquero, A. R., Jennings, W. G., Jemison, E., Kaukinen, C., & Knaul, F. M. (2021). Domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic-Evidence from a systematic review and meta­ analysis. Journal of criminal justice, 74, 101806. 5. Pomeranz, J. L., & Schwid, A. R. (2021). Governmental actions to address COVID-19 misinformation. Journal of public health policy, 42, 201-210. www.aapi.org.au ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0041 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0042 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0042.pdf Xx CarersTAS Australia Carers Tasmania’s Submission on the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry November 2023 About Carers Tasmania Carers Tasmania is the Peak Body representing the more than 80,0 0 informal carers (hereafter carers) in the state. Carers Tasmania’s vision is for an Australia that values and supports carers. Our mission is to work to improve the health, wellbeing, resilience and financial security of carers and to ensure that caring is a shared responsibility of family, community, and government. Our values drive everything we think, say, and do. • Carers first - we listen to what carers need, commit to their desired action plan, and deliver results that matter most to carers • Care in all we do - we care for our work, about each other, about Tasmania’s family and friend carers, and the bigger world we all share • Integrity always - we are transparent, act ethically, own when things don’t go to plan and do what we say we will • Quality every time - we don’t accept ‘good enough’ because carers deserve our very best every time • Speed that matters - we are agile and don’t put off what can be done today. These values represent how we engage with and serve carers, how we work with each other, and our commitment to the broader community. Carers Tasmania encourages partnership with governments and health and community sectors to enhance service provision and improve conditions for family or friend carers through policy development, research and advocacy. We acknowledge and support people of all genders, sexualities, cultural beliefs, and abilities and understand that carers in Tasmania, whilst sharing the common theme of caring for a family member or friend, are diverse individuals with varying beliefs, experiences, and identities. We value and respect the diversity of carers, their lived and living experiences, and recognise that carers are the experts in their own lives. Carers Tasmania has offices in Moonah, Launceston, and Burnie. Please direct any enquiries about this report to: Samantha Fox Chief Executive Officer Phone: Email: Carers Tasmania’s submission on the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry 2 Contents 1. Background....................................................................................................................... 4 2. Introduction....................................................................................................................... 5 3. Significant impacts oncarers............................................................................................. 5 4. Response to the Inquiry.................................................................................................... 7 5. Recommendations............................................................................................................ 8 Carers Tasmania’s submission on the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry 3 1. Background Carers Tasmania is the Peak Body representing the more than 80,000 informal carers within the state. A carer is a person who provides unpaid care and support to a family member, or friend, with disability, mental ill health, a chronic or life-limiting condition, alcohol or other drug dependence, or who is frail or aged. Informal kinship carers who care for a child under the age of 18, because the parent is unable to, are also recognised as carers. Carers are predominantly family members, but may also be friends, neighbours, or colleagues. Informal carers are not to be confused with paid support workers who are often called ‘carers’, with the difference being that support workers are fully employed and remunerated with all the benefits of employment. On the contrary, informal carers perform their caring duties without remuneration, other than minimal carer payments and allowances from the Australian Government. In addition to representing carers through the Peak Body activities, Carers Tasmania provides support to carers living in Tasmania through its service delivery arm, Care2Serve. The Commonwealth Carer Gateway program is delivered through Care2Serve in Tasmania, as are other supports and services, such as the Tasmanian Government’s Home and Community Care program. The Carer Gateway program provides a range of services and supports for carers which are designed to build resilience, increase wellbeing, improve quality of life, and sustain carers to effectively continue their caring roles. The available supports include the provision of information, advice and referrals, holistic identification of carer strengths and needs through a carer support planning process, professional counselling, peer support, and coaching which aims to support carers in achieving specific goals. Care2Serve, through the Carer Gateway, has the capacity to fund certain instances of planned, practical support services such as in-home respite, personal care, domestic assistance, and meal preparation. Care2Serve may also fund items such as laptops to assist carers who are studying or trying to enter the workforce. Care2Serve also coordinates the provision of emergency support during instances where a carer may be unable to provide the care that they usually do, resulting from unexpected illness or injury of the carer. Carers Tasmania’s submission on the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry 4 2. Introduction Carers Tasmania welcomes the opportunity to provide feedback on the Commonwealth Government’s COVID-19 Inquiry (the Inquiry). The impacts of COVID-19 have been significant and wide-reaching; however, there have been many lessons learned. This Inquiry provides an opportunity to transform the negative experiences associated with COVID-19 into positive planning and safeguarding for the future. We must learn from these experiences and ensure that disaster preparedness plans are developed. These plans must specifically acknowledge at-risk cohorts, such as carers, who felt unrecognised during the pandemic despite their additional needs. Carers Tasmania’s response highlights some significant impacts experienced by carers and makes recommendations to be considered in any pandemic or disaster preparedness planning. 3. Significant impacts on carers The following points have been collated from various surveys of carers and highlight the impacts and increased responsibilities carers faced during the pandemic. Tasmanian COVID Impact Survey 2022 Carer responses: • Most carers (43.5%) preferred TV or radio to keep them up to date with information about COVID-19. This was especially true for 54.9% of carers aged 65 or older. • 50.4% of carers indicated there was nobody else who could step in for them in their caring role. • 59.5% of carers chose to self-isolate to protect those they were caring for during the pandemic. • 79.5% of carers reported feeling emotionally drained. • 61 % of carers reported their expenses increased following the opening of the Tasmanian borders. • 13.8% of carers reported partial job loss and 2.7% completely lost their job during the pandemic. • 8.3% of carers with a school-aged child indicated they intended to continue home­ schooling their child despite schools re-opening. • 75.8% of employed carers had not been provided the option to work from home.1 Carer Wellbeing Survey 2022 Carer responses: • 74.2% of carers reduced their social interaction to protect those they cared for during the pandemic. • 72.2% of carers indicated their caring responsibilities increased. • 63.9% of carers reported increased levels of isolation. • 61.5% of carers had reduced access to formal support services.2 1 Carers Tasmania. (2022). Carers Tasmania COVID Impact Survey 2022. https://carerstas.org/wp- content/uploads/2023/08/Carers-Tasmania-COVI D-lmpact-Survey-2022-Report-.pdf 2 Schirmer, J., Mylek, M., & Miranti, R. (2022). Caring for Others and Yourself: 2022 Carer Wellbeing Survey. Full data report Carers Australia. https://www.carersaustralia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/2022-CWS-Full- Report_221010_FINAL.pdf Carers Tasmania’s submission on the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry 5 National Carer Survey 2022 Carer responses: • 44.8% of carers were separated from their loved ones for long periods of time during the pandemic (this was mostly within the context of hospitals or residential aged care facilities). • 67.5% of carers of people with disability experienced a reduction or cessation of support during the pandemic. This was also the case for 42% of carers supporting someone accessing mental health services, and 40.4% of carers supporting someone accessing aged care services.3 Caring Fairly Coalition COVID-19 Survey 2020 Carer responses: • 60% of carers lost the usual supports provided for the person they care for during the pandemic. • 44% of carers indicated they spent an increased amount of time on unpaid care. • 81 % of carers reported their personal mental health had deteriorated. • 52% of carers indicated their stress levels had increased either by a lot or an extreme amount. • 37% of carers lost some or all of their income during the pandemic.4 Carers Victoria COVID-19 Survey 2022 Carer responses: • 85% of carers reported feeling socially isolated during the pandemic. • 51 % of carers indicated their mental health was worse or a lot worse than prior to the pandemic. • Over 80% of carers reported they spent more time providing care during the pandemic. • More than 50% of carers were providing complex care that was usually provided by trained professionals.5 Despite carers being a high-risk group for catching COVID-19 due to their own health issues or because of caring for people who are high risk, the Carers Tasmania’s 2022 report found that only 3.93% of respondents had tested positive for COVID-19. Whilst this low rate is pleasing, the survey found that the potential reason for this was that 59.5% of carers chose to self-isolate as a preventative measure. While low rates of COVID-19 amongst carers could result from self-chosen isolation, the consequences faced by self-isolating included exacerbated loneliness and loss of practical and/or emotional support. In addition, carers also experienced a loss of income, employment implications, difficulties in accessing essential items, and overall, a greater risk of carer burnout. 3 Carers NSW. (2023). 2022 National Carer Survey: Full report. Available online at: http://www.carersnsw.org.au/research/survey 4 Caring Fairly. (2020). COVID-19 Carer Survey, https://www.carersvictoria.org.au/media/2154/caring-fairly- covid19-survey-results.pdf 5 Carers Victoria. (2022). Overview of findings from the Victorian COVID-19 carer survey. https://www.carersvictoria.org.au/media/4234/2754-carers-vic-overview-of-victorian-covid19-carer-survey_fa.pdf Carers Tasmania’s submission on the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry 6 4. Response to the Inquiry Carers Tasmania’s primary advocacy aim is for carers to be considered as a priority cohort alongside other specific priority cohorts in planning for any disaster or pandemic. There must be consideration and planning specifically for carers, to ensure their own safety, wellbeing, and to support them to sustain their caring roles. To date, several cohorts have been acknowledged as high-risk for COVID-19 due to health, age, or disability status. Unfortunately, carers have remained unrecognised despite the crucial role they play. There are more than 80,000 carers in Tasmania and 2.65 million carers across Australia. Specific pieces of legislation aim to increase the recognition and support of carers both on a national level through the Carer Recognition Act 2010 (Cth)6 and at the state level through legislation such as the Tasmanian Carer Recognition Act 2023.7 Despite these Acts outlining the importance of carer recognition, inclusion, and the right of carers to be supported themselves, carers were largely forgotten throughout COVID-19. Throughout COVID-19, Care2Serve provided food and basic care packages to carers in Tasmania who couldn’t leave their house. After the borders opened to Tasmania in December 2021, Carers Tasmania conducted a survey to examine the impact of COVID-19 on carers. This survey built on the findings from a previous survey that was conducted in 2020. The 2021 survey found that more than half of respondents (59.5%) chose to self­ isolate as a preventative measure. This meant that many carers went without usual support from their service providers, and/or also struggled to access essentials. Most of the carers who chose to self-isolate (56.1 %) were aged 65 years or older. Several resources were circulated about what help was available to people with disability, but information specifically for carers was lacking. During the initial stages of COVID-19, Care2Serve completed check-in calls to carers to find out how they were coping. The feedback received from carers suggested that these calls were very much appreciated, and for many carers, this was the first time during the pandemic that someone asked how they were. Some carers reported they were unable to access certain forms of respite. In-home supports such as domestic assistance, personal care, and respite became limited. Respite was even more restricted in residential aged care facilities. This resulted in carers not being able to access breaks or have time for themselves to rest and recharge. To ensure the wellbeing of carers, and sustain their capacity to continue providing care, carers must have opportunities to take time for themselves. The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety Special Report on COVID-198 highlighted significant negative impacts that resulted from the public health orders that restricted visitors to residential aged care facilities. This meant that many carers were unable to spend time with their loved ones. Often, when a person enters residential aged care, either permanently or for respite, carers still find themselves assisting with meals, washing, appointments, personal care, and both social and emotional support. The restrictions on these activities caused great distress and confusion. 6 Commonwealth Carer Recognition Act. (2010). https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2010A00123 7 Tasmanian Carer Recognition Act (2023). https://www.legislation.tas.gov.au/view/whole/html/inforce/2023-04- 20/act-2023-001 8 Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. (2020). Aged care and COVID-19: a special report. https://www.royalcommission.gov.au/system/files/2021-03/aged-care-and-covid-19-a-special-report.pdf Carers Tasmania’s submission on the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry 7 As highlighted by Carers Australia, the Australian Government Coronavirus Supplement that was introduced in March 2020 increased the amount of several social security payments, including JobSeeker, Youth Allowance, and Parenting Payment. However, people receiving the Carer Payment, Disability Support Pension, and Age Pension were excluded from these extra payments, despite the significant impacts that COVID-19 had on their finances.9 Carers Australia also highlighted issues regarding other COVID-19 payments that didn’t consider carers. As an example, the Pandemic Leave Disaster Payment was available to eligible families who were isolating with their children if their child was 16 or under. Carers of older children with disability missed out, despite their need to stay at home and provide support during the pandemic.10 Carers shared many scenarios where they were not allowed in health settings when needed by the person they were caring for. These situations were stressful and challenging and at times led to poor outcomes for the people seeking treatment. The following case studies are just two examples: Case Study: Mr. A is a single father caring for his 9-year-old Autistic son. His son has an NDIS plan, but there is not enough funding in the plan for respite or activities. Recently, his son had to go to the emergency department in a North-West Tasmanian hospital and his father was told he was not allowed into the emergency room. Mr. A insisted that it was critical for him to be in the room and he would most definitely be accompanying his son. The hospital director eventually came to speak with Mr. A, which resulted in him being permitted to be present with his son in the emergency room. This is a distressing situation that could easily have been avoided. Case Study: A young carer who identifies as LGBTIQ+ shared their story about how their partner was admitted to a Southern Tasmanian hospital. Their partner has multiple health issues, but also co-occurring and complex mental ill health. The young carer was told they were not allowed to be at the hospital with their partner, despite being their only carer and support person. This was a very distressing situation for both the young carer and their partner who really needed their support during this time. 5. Recommendations Carers Tasmania recommends the following: • Embed the routine identification, referral, and support of carers, as required under the Carer Recognition Act 2010, as a central component of all Government and Government-funded services. • Recognise carers as a priority cohort who must be considered in planning for disasters, pandemics, and other significant unforeseen circumstances. • Ensure that policy, funding grants, and guidelines allow for flexibility in the delivery of support for carers in the case of any disasters, pandemic, or other significantly disruptive situations. 9 Carers Australia. (2022). Carers Australia Response to Long COVID Inquiry. https://www.carersaustralia.com.aU/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/FINAL-Carers-Australia-Response-to-Long- COVID-lnquiry-Nov-2022.pdf 10 Ibid. Carers Tasmania’s submission on the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry 8 • Ensure that carers are recognised as a vulnerable cohort in need of additional government supplements in the case of any future disaster or pandemic due to the significant impacts on them and their need to provide increased care. • Policy, particularly within healthcare settings, must be clear and inclusive of the rights and needs of carers. • Given the low literacy rates and digital barriers experienced across communities, there must be strategically planned communications that are accessible and understandable for everyone during pandemics and natural disasters. • Introduce increased protections and flexibility for employed carers, especially when unforeseen circumstances arise. There must also be adequate and accessible training pathways for carers who want to study, enter, or re-enter the workforce. Carers Tasmania’s submission on the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry 9 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0042 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0043 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0043.pdf ASCEPT AUSTRALASIAN SOCIETY OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL PHARMACOLOGISTS AND TOXICOLOGISTS Tuesday, 28 November 2023 Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry Australian Government Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet To whom It may concern, Thank you for the opportunity to submit to the Australian Commonwealth Government’s Inquiry into the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Australasian Society of Clinical and Experimental Pharmacologists (ASCEPT) is the peak professional society devoted to advancing excellence in Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology and Toxicology in Australasia. Many of our members made invaluable contributions to the pandemic response locally, nationally and internationally. There are a number of core pharmacology principles underlyingtherapeutic decision makingthat should have been more fastidiously adopted in the pandemic response.(1) These include: (1) Applying principles of best practice in pre-clinical lead compound design and drug repurposing (2) applying pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic principles to identify the plausibility of potential therapies (3) robust, nationally coordinated and efficient clinical trial design (4) timely and effective communication to consumers and health care practitioners of trial outcomes and (5) equitable and timely access to treatments (6) timely access to routinely collected health data to facilitate observational studies of vaccines and treatments (7) leadership from the diverse specialist craft groups within ASCEPT from basic pre- clinical to clinical pharmacology in the coordination of the above activities Secretariat: Suite 11,137-143 Racecourse Road, Ascot Queensland, Australia 4007 jP ABN: 78 008 461 354 www.ascept.org ascept@ascept.org +61 7 3833 9610 Twitter @ASCEPTanz ASCEPT AUSTRALASIAN SOCIETY OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL PHARMACOLOGISTS AND TOXICOLOGISTS Application of these principles can optimise use of effective pharmacological interventions (vaccines and treatments) and minimise use of ineffective interventions. In the pandemic response, there were a number of domains where significant Clinical Pharmacologist, Experimental Pharmacologist and Toxicologist contribution was important and should be replicated in any subsequent pandemic response. These include contributions to: 1. the National Clinical Evidence Taskforce. There was and will be a need for rapid assessment of data but consistent high quality assessment 2. evidence synthesis and effective communication to health care practitioners 3. providing expert review for clinical trials of potential COVID therapies through Human Research and Ethics Committees There were a number of domains that were clearly deficient in the pandemic response. Pharmacologist contribution in these domains would likely have improved outcomes and should be considered in any subsequent pandemic response. These include: 1. community messaging about the risk:benefit of vaccine safety (particularly the Astra Zeneca vaccine), which was inadequate 2. early access to vaccines 3. community messaging around vaccine and treatment safety to counter misinformation, particularly early in the pandemic 4. developing local manufacturing capacity for medicines (both for pandemic and non-pandemic medicines). There were various supply chain issues throughout the pandemic, which resulted in shortages of a number of medicines. Secretariat: Suite 11,137-143 Racecourse Road, Ascot Queensland, Australia 4007 jP ABN: 78 008 461 354 www.ascept.org ascept@ascept.org +61 7 3833 9610 Twitter @ASCEPTanz ASCEPT AUSTRALASIAN SOCIETY OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL PHARMACOLOGISTS AND TOXICOLOGISTS The absence of a national medicines information service that can provide unbiased, trusted information to all health professionals providing care is a notable deficit in the Australian medicine’s landscape, as is the recent de-funding of the National Prescribing Service. Medicines information needs to be underpinned by robust clinical pharmacology learning and implementation. We strongly encourage the development of such a service prior to the next emergency situation such that communication pathways and networks are already established. Yours sincerely A/Prof Bridin Murnion MBChB FRACP FFPMANZCA FAChAM President Australasian Society of Clinical and Experimental Pharmacologists and Toxicologists (1) Baker EH, Gnjidic D, Kirkpatrick CMJ, Pirmohamed M, Wright DFB, Zecharia AY. A call for the appropriate application of clinical pharmacological principles in the search for safe and efficacious COVID-19 (SARS-COV-2) treatments. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2021 Mar;87(3):707-711. doi: 10.1111/bcp.14416. Epub2020Jun 19. PMID: 32515023. Secretariat: Suite 11,137-143 Racecourse Road, Ascot Queensland, Australia 4007 jP ABN: 78 008 461 354 www.ascept.org ascept@ascept.org +61 7 3833 9610 Twitter @ASCEPTanz ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0043 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0044 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0044.pdf Dear Covid 19 Response Enquiry, The following submission is in regard to the consequences and effects the Australian Federal and State Governments covid 19 response decisions had, and continue to have, on myself and my wife. At the beginning My wife and I had commenced a years sabbatical during which we were travelling via^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^fwith a return date planned for^^^^^^| The Australian Governments advice against travel was issued after our departure. In and located in^^^^^A/e were plunged into lockdown. At the start of^^J:he^Bgovernment lifted some of its travel bans and we were free to travel in ^^^|which we undertook. it became apparent to us that the Australian government's decision, of indeterminable length, to drastically limit flights into the country, along with its uncompromising hotel quarantine policy, was severely restricting travel and effectively acting as a financial border closure to those Australians overseas getting home. It was at this point in late that we began to attempt to book a flight home to Australia. After many attempts, with many flight changes and with increased costs, including the change of our destination from our home airport of ^^^^^|we successfully returned to Australia in Like tens of thousands of others, we experienced the horror of hotel quarantine. The forced denial of our basic human rights, our liberty and freedom, even access to fresh air was what we were greeted with on our home soil. We had no choice but to comply and were effectively coerced under the watchful eyes of members of the^^Hpolice, government officials and armed forces into a transaction (Quarantine fees, provision of care -biopsychoscoial medical, food, drink, fresh air, warmth and shelter, with a nebulous body (State government health department or hotel or federal government - the legal framework remains entirely dubious as to who holds the ownership of cost and responsibility and has not been tested in court to my knowledge)). During the quarantine period we received brief, poorly delivered and inconsistent check in phone calls (Not every day) to the hotel room. We did not leave the room for 14 days and during this period did not have access to fresh air (the windows did not open) however the experience and subsequent ill qualified support from the 'nurse' on the phone illustrated too me that no one was immune to the mental health impact of having ones basic human rights removed in such a manner, and that there would be many who were experiencing this at a much higher level of acuteness causing a genuine risk to life. To add insult to injury, I was charged $1000 and my wife $3000 for the privilege of this incarceration, the unethical and immoral nature of a cost as well as the disparity in costs escapes my reasoning. Subsequent to this experience in wife was again coerced into signing a document stating that she would be prepared to pay for hotel quarantine in her future return to Australia, that she would not return within three months, and that without this signed acknowledgement, a permission to fly would not be granted. My wife arrived When my wife did return tc^^^^^|Australia she was again incarcerated in hotel quarantine, but this time with the additional trauma of alone in isolation. Despite requests to quarantine at home, request was denied. The argument must be made that; there is no reasonable moral justification for a state or government to implement and charge a member of the public a cost for a measure the government has imposed in this regard, and which denies basic human rights, to purportedly be the best and only measure available to protect the population at large from harm, and that results in a detrimental physical and / or mental impact on the individual. We (My wife and I) continue to be harassed and pursued for payment by the authorities of though not currently (at the time of writing) b\^|for payment of the hotel quarantine, to which we did not willingly and freely accept. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0044 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0045 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0045.pdf November 29th, 2023 Response to Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry Associate Professor Long Chu1, Professor R. Quentin Grafton1*, Professor Tom Kompa2 1. Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian national University 2. Centre of Excellence for Biosecurity Risk Analysis, University of Melbourne * Contact authorJJgQ^Eyj^yyByjggBI Overview We are responding to only one of the Terms of Reference of the COVID-19 Response Inquiry, namely: Key health response measures (for example across COVID-19 vaccinations and treatments, key medical supplies such as personal protective equipment, quarantine facilities, and public health messaging We have, collectively and separately, published extensively on COVID-19 in the peer-reviewed academic literature including in: Sage Open, Journal of Public Health, PLOS Global Health, PLOS ONE, Economic Analysis and Policy, and Royal Society Open Science. A list of these publications is attached. Our submission is focussed on the effectiveness of lockdown in Australia and other countries as means to reduce the contagion of COVID-19 and is based on peer-reviewed publication by Chu et al.1 (2023) in Sage Open from November 2023 based on data from 2020-22 for three countries: Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Key Findings for Australia, Canada, and United Kingdom Many countries mandated social distancing measures during the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020-22 that variously included opening hours restrictions on hospitality and retail, economy-wide lockdowns, and additional international border controls. We analysed whether more restrictive (hereafter, closures) or less restrictive (hereafter, openings) social distancing measures changed the short-term trends in the number of COVID-19 cases, hospitalisations, and ICU patients in Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Our analysis uses a 'before-and-'after' trend analysis (decremental/incremental and growth/decay trends) to compare the trends of epidemic indicators before and after each closure or opening event. Results show that, in general, and for these three countries: (a) closures resulted in reduced trend growth and (b) openings resulted in increased trend growth for the three selected measures of public health. Our results provide a robust finding, independent of statistical and model assumptions and framing, that mandated lockdowns were effective at controlling the growth in COVID-19 in 2020-21 for the three selected countries. These results are important counter evidence to a narrative that mandatory social distancing measures, including mask wearing, are either ineffective or not required for controlling airborne infectious diseases such as COVID-19. Findings for Australia Figure 1 summarises COVID-19 outbreaks in Australia and shows major lockdowns (in black vertical lines) and openings (in purple vertical dashed lines). COVID-19 restrictions in Australia began with a nationwide lockdown in March 2020, with subsequent lockdowns implemented by state governments. The (first) national lockdown was implemented by the federal government, supported by all state and territory governments, as an emergency response to the first outbreak of the disease in Australia. This national lockdown coincided with the closure of the international border to non-citizens. After the initial outbreak, federal public health restrictions started to ease from late April to May 2020. When a second COVID-19 outbreak emerged in the state of Victoria in July 2020, a lockdown was reinstated in 1 L. Chu, R.Q. Grafton. T. Kompas and M-L McLaws. Effects of Closures and Openings on Public Health in the Time of COVID-19: A Cross-Country and Temporal Trend Analysis, Sage Open Volume 13, 4 https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231207472 1 November 29th, 2023 Melbourne, the second-largest city in Australia, and quickly upscaled to the entire state. This Victorian lockdown lasted until October 2020, i.e., the second vertical purple line in Figure 2. Subsequently, some short lockdowns were applied by both the New South Wales (NSW) and Victorian governments in response to COVID-19 outbreaks until late June 2021. The third COVID-19 outbreak in Australia, triggered by the Delta variant, emerged in June 2021 and prompted a return to stringent lockdowns in both states. Beginning in October 2021, when the NSW state vaccination rate reached 70% of 16+ years population, the state government progressively relaxed its public health restrictions. In early December 2021, Australia's international borders were opened to citizens and their relatives, and shortly thereafter to all international visitors. 160 8 2 Zoom in 3/20 8/21 period x 140 0.5 o 5 ! tn i QJ 120 o 0J 4^ 100 3 P2 cd st M ■s 80 .2 S' 3 Qh 'p o 60 .2 'Z. CM O II S JS 03 Q a 40 8 20 S 1^2 0 0 Feb 20 Jul 20 Jan 21 Jul 21 Feb 22 —Cases (left axis) —Hospitalisation (right axis) ICU (right axis)| Figure 1. COVID-19 lockdowns and openings in Australia, 2020-2022 Table 1 summarises the trend analysis for Australia, namely, when there were beneficial changes in epidemic outcomes after lockdowns (in white rows) and when there were detrimental changes after openings (in grey rows). At the national level, Table 1 shows the impact of the international border closure and nation-wide lockdown measures. After Australia closed its international borders and instituted the first lockdown in March 2020, the number of cases continued to increase over the short­ term, but the increasing trend was flattened in all considered scenarios, i.e., lower incremental rate and growth rate of epidemic indicators. When the national lockdown ended in early May 2020, the epidemic trends increased, at least in the short-term. When the international border was opened to the relatives of citizens in early December 2021, and to all international travellers in February 2022, the growth in COVID-19 increased relative to the pre-opening trends. After April 2020, lockdowns in Australia were implemented by state governments. The most important, in terms of duration and stringency, was the Victorian lockdown that began in June 2020 (Grafton et al., 2021)2. Our trend analysis indicates this 2020 Victorian lockdown was highly effective at reducing the trend growth in COVID-19 cases. There were also beneficial trend growth changes 2 R.Q. Grafton, J. Parslow, T. Kompas, K. Glass and E. Banks (2021) Epidemiological Modelling of the Health and Economic Effects of COVID-19 control in Australia's Second Wave. Journal of Public Health, https://doi.org/10.1007/sl0389-021- 2 November 29th, 2023 associated with the Northern Beaches of Sydney outbreak in December 2020, another outbreak in Victoria in May 2021, and an additional outbreak in Greater Sydney in June 2021. Table 1. Openings and Closings in Australia 2020-21 Positive COVID-19 COVID-19 Cases Hospitalisations COVID- 19 ICU patients Mean Trend Growt Mean Trend Growt Mean Trend Growt (%) (%) h(%) (%) (%) h(%) (%) (%) h(%) Mar-20: National border closure followed by 14 100 100 NA NA NA NA NA NA national closure \kiy-20: Closure end 100 100 100 0 100 100 0 100 100 l)ec-21: Holder open to 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 relatives of citizens______ l eb-22: Border open lo 0 100 100 0 0 0 0 visitors Jun-20: Closure begins in Victoria, starts in 0 0 100 0 0 0 NA NA NA Melbourne Oct-20: Victoria closure 0 0 0 0 NA \\ (began June 201 ends Dec-20: Closure begins in New South Wales (North 0 100 100 NA NA NA NA NA NA Beaches, Sydney) Jan-21: New South Wales closure (began Dec 20) 0 86 86 NA NA NA MBUi X.\ ends May-21: Closure reinstated in Victoria 43 100 100 NA NA NA NA NA NA (May 21) Jun-21: Victoria closure (began May 2 1) ends 0 100 100 NA NA NA IMMi XA Jun-21: Closure begins New South Wales, 0 86 100 NA NA NA NA NA NA starting fin Greater Sydney Oct-21: New South Wales closure (began Jun 21) 0 86 71 0 100 100 0 100 100 ends Aug-21: Closure 0 0 14 71 57 57 NA NA NA recommences in Victoria Oct-21: Victoria closure 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 (beuan Aim 2 1) ends Notes to Table 1. 1. 'Mean’ ‘Trend’ and ‘Growth’ columns correspond to changes in the average, the linear trend, and the rate of change (growth rate) of epidemic indicators. 2.Numbers above 50% are in bold. NA values indicate inadequate data, for example, missing data or pre-closure numbers were small (all equal to 5 or below) for reliable trend analysis. 3. White (grey) cells represent the fraction of scenarios with beneficial (detrimental) changes after closures (openings), that is, slower increasing/growing (declining) or faster-declining (increasing) trends. If the number of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations or ICU patients remained small (i.e., equal to or less than 5) during the entire evaluation period, we did not count it as an unwanted change regardless of their trend coefficients. 3 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0045 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0046 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0046.pdf Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission and share my views about the Commonwealth Government’s response to COVID-19. My key message is the overriding importance of prioritising efforts to prevent future pandemics. It seems to me that, perhaps more than any other kind of catastrophic risk, it’s within our power to prevent novel pathogens from emerging and to quickly identify, contain and eliminate them if they do. Given the enormity of human and economic costs of pandemics - and that pandemics much worse than COVID-19 are possible - prevention should be our primary goal. I think preventing pathogens from emerging and controlling them if they do should be top priorities for the new Australian Centre for Disease Control. Bernstein et al make the economic case for this in their paper “The costs and benefits of primary prevention of zoonotic pandemics”. They show that, even on pessimistic assumptions and without considering the potential impact of promising emerging technologies, significant investment in pandemic prevention is overwhelmingly justified. My comments go primarily to ‘preventive health measures’ in terms of reference 3. My first concern is that advancing technology is rapidly making it possible for a large number of people to create novel pathogens that are difficult to contain. Nature can produce pathogens that are extremely infectious like measles, with an estimated RO of 15-20. Nature can also produce pathogens that are extremely fatal like rabies, which has an almost 100% death rate. Nature, however, is not known to produce pathogens that have both high transmissibility and high mortality. Humans, driven by various motivations, could be on the verge of creating pathogens with both these features - risking pandemics much worse than COVID-19. The convergence of open science leading to the publication of dangerous knowledge, democratisation of synthetic biology, and Al-assisted research might mean that a small group of nefarious actors could cause catastrophic harm. The Unabomber, Theodore Kaczynski, and the Aum Shinrikyo cult both engaged in terrorism motivated by bringing the end of civilisation. If active in the year 2023, it is conceivable that COVID-19 would have inspired them to seek to engineer a pandemic pathogen. An Aum Shinrinkyo member had a virology PhD and obtained the pathogen B. anthracis which produces the toxin anthrax in an attempt to make it more lethal. Similarly, the Unabomber was a mathematics prodigy and professor, who had the capacity to leverage emerging technologies to further his goals. Preventing the next pandemic requires making sure that highly skilled bad actors never have the capability to engineer a novel pathogen. However, a variety of trends are making this a realistic possibility. Open science norms - while typically essential to modern science - sometimes allow the publication of dangerous material. While the scientists who published the genomic sequences of the smallpox virus perhaps didn’t foresee a future where the synthesised DNA was readily available, that information cannot be “unpublished”. I recommend that the inquiry read “Information Hazards in Biotechnology” (2018) by Lewis et al fora deeper understanding of this risk and more examples, including Mousepox and Botulinum toxin H. Similarly, Al models are on the cusp of being able to provide substantial assistance to people doing research and filling tacit knowledge gaps. Again, if action is not taken and models with these capabilities become widely available, we may not be able to “unpublish” them. Overall, I think the Inquiry should task the new CDC with responsibility for tracking the risk that a bad actor could create a pathogen with pandemic potential, and ensuring that safeguards remain one step ahead of that risk. My second concern is that our poorly regulated animal agriculture industries are exposing us to intolerable levels of biosecurity risks. In exchange for cheap meat from factory farms, people are dying of bacterial infections that were trivial to treat a few decades ago and facing escalating rates of pandemics that devastate lives and livelihoods. Simply put, factory farms are pressure cookers in which nature cooks up novel pathogens. According to the UN, there will be an estimated 10 billion people in 2050. Without paradigm shifts in industry or culture, I’m concerned that accelerating demands for meat will only increase and intensify these risks. Intensive farming practices produce inexpensive meat due to the supposed efficiencies of increasing animal farming density. Animals are being packed closer and closer together in factory farms, breathing and defecating on top of each other. This environment is a breeding ground for novel pathogens whose evolution is accelerated by the density of homogenous hosts and the abundance of transmission routes. These practices have a negative public health externality in both antimicrobial resistance and pandemic potential viruses. The Inquiry shouldn’t stand for industries that profit by endangering people in Australia and around the world. Antibiotics are fed to animals to reduce bacterial infections and boost growth - 70% of antibiotics produced globally are used in farmed animals, and estimates project that Australia will see a 16% increase in antibiotic usage in farming over the decade to 2030. This overuse is a driver of antibiotic-resistant infections globally. In 2020, antimicrobial resistance was attributed to 1,031 deaths, $439 million in costs of premature death and the loss of 27,705 quality-adjusted life years in Australia (). I understand that the Australian Government has worked with industry so that its “livestock and seafood industries [have] ... little to no resistance to antimicrobials”, and these steps should be lauded. However, this same approach to ensuring intensive animal farming doesn’t risk human lives needs to be expanded to include viruses - they key cause of pandemics. Viruses with pandemic potential often originate in wildlife but can cross the species barrier and pose a catastrophic risk to Humans. Wildlife are natural hosts for viruses that can persist without causing significant harm to the animals. Occasionally, these viruses can spill over from wildlife to farmed animals. In these farms, the viruses encounter new environments and species, providing opportunities for genetic recombination and adaptation. This process can enhance the virus's ability to infect and transmit among different hosts, including humans. The proximity of wildlife, farmed animals, and humans in certain settings, such as live animal markets, live exports, slaughterhouses or factory farms, increases the likelihood of interspecies transmission events, potentially leading to the emergence of novel and more transmissible viruses with pandemic potential. We now know that the 2009 H1N1 flu pandemic which caused an estimated 284,000 excess deaths originated first in swine farms in central Mexico. This quote taken from peer reviewed paper “Origins of the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic in swine in Mexico”: “ This highlights the critical role that animal trading plays in bringing together diverse viruses from different continents, which can then combine and generate new pandemic viruses. “ Australia needs to drastically decrease the pathogen transmission risks from high animal densities in live legal or illegal animal trade, live animal exports and factory farming. Australia’s biosecurity strategies need to require the industry to take practical steps to reduce these risks. Where the risks remain too great or the prevention of pathogen transmission is too costly, Australia has a duty to end these practices to avert pandemics and our slow death from antimicrobial resistance. I think Australia can and needs to do better than prediction ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0046 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0047 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0047.pdf Courtney Henry Dear Ms Kruk, Professor Bennet, Dr Jackson, Submission for the Commonwealth Government’s COVID-19 Response Inquiry I am a mid-career professional working within the environmental sector in Western Australia. I appreciate the opportunity to share my views about the Commonwealth Government’s response to COVID-19. My comments are primarily in relation to the terms of reference which address ‘governance’ and ‘preventive health measures’. Prevention as a priority Given the enormity of human and economic costs of pandemics - and that pandemics much worse than COVID-19 are possible - prevention should be our primary goal. It is within our power to prevent novel pathogens from emerging and to quickly identify, contain and eliminate them if they do. Preventing pathogens from emerging and controlling them if they do should be top priorities for the new Australian Centre for Disease Control. Bernstein et al make the economic case for this in their paper “The costs and benefits of primary prevention of zoonotic pandemics”. They show that, even on pessimistic assumptions and without considering the potential impact of promising emerging technologies, significant investment in pandemic prevention is overwhelmingly justified. Sources: The costs and benefits of primary prevention of zoonotic pandemics - PMC (nih.gov) Factory farms are a way in which nature may develop such novel pathogens. In exchange for cheap meat from factory farms, people are dying of bacterial infections that were trivial to treat a few decades ago. Without paradigm shifts in industry or culture, I’m concerned that accelerating demands for meat will only increase and intensify these risks. Antibiotics are fed to animals to reduce bacterial infections and boost growth - 70% of antibiotics produced globally are used in livestock, and estimates project that Australia will see a 16% increase in antibiotic usage in farming over the decade to 2030. This overuse is a driver of antibiotic-resistant infections globally. In 2020, antimicrobial resistance was attributed to 1,031 deaths, $439 million in costs of premature death and the loss of 27,705 quality-adjusted life years in Australia. I understand that the Australian Government has worked with industry so that its “livestock and seafood industries [have] ... little to no resistance to antimicrobials”, and these steps should be lauded. However, this same approach to ensuring intensive animal farming doesn’t risk human lives needs to be expanded to include viruses - the key cause of pandemics. Viruses with pandemic potential often originate in wildlife but can cross the species barrier and pose a great risk to humans. Wild animals are natural hosts for viruses that can persist without causing significant harm to the animals. Occasionally, these viruses can spill over from wildlife to livestock in farms. In these farms, the viruses encounter new environments and species, providing opportunities for genetic recombination and adaptation. This process can enhance the virus's ability to infect and transmit among different hosts, including humans. The proximity of wildlife, livestock, and humans in certain settings, such as live animal markets, live exports, abattoirs or factory farms, increases the likelihood of interspecies transmission events, potentially leading to the emergence of novel and more transmissible viruses with pandemic potential. We now know that the 2009 H1N1 flu pandemic which caused an estimated 284,000 excess deaths originated first in swine farms in central Mexico. This quote taken from peer reviewed paper “Origins of the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic in swine in Mexico”: “ This highlights the critical role that animal trading plays in bringing together diverse viruses from different continents, which can then combine and generate new pandemic viruses. “ Australia needs to drastically decrease the pathogen transmission risks from high animal densities in live legal or illegal animal trade, live animal exports and factory farming. Australia’s biosecurity strategies should require the industry to take practical steps to reduce these risks. Where the risks remain too great or the prevention of pathogen transmission is too costly, Australia has a duty to end these practices to avert pandemics. I think Australia can and needs to do better than ^^^^^^^^^|prediction. Citations • Disease burden, associated mortality and economic impact of antimicrobial resistant infections in Australia • Antibiotic use in farming set to soar despite drug-resistance fears (see table 1) • H1N1 Pandemic - Quick stats • Origins of the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic in swine in Mexico To conclude, I think pandemics are one of the most important issues of our time, and the risk from zoonotic pandemics potentially arising in factory farms is alarming. I think this inguiry should carefully consider how future pandemics could start and ensure it makes specific recommendations to reduce their likelihood. Kind regards, Courtney ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0047 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0048 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0048.pdf SUBMISSION TO COVID-19 RESPONSE INQUIRY Prepared by Dr Terry Bellair 30 November 2023 My name is (Dr) John Terence (Terry) Bellair, principal of Environmental Science Associates. I received my PhD (biochemistry) in 1965 and was involved in biomedical research and teaching in Australia and the USA for the next 7 years. I commenced work as an environmental science consultant in 1973 and am now transitioning to retirement. Since the late-1970s, my consulting career has focussed on air quality management. I was the principal author of the Victorian EPA’s original Air Policy, have presented expert evidence at well over 200 tribunal and court hearings, and have been appointed to about 30 planning panels and ministerial advisory committees. My submission summarises the failure of some key pandemic responses to take account of basic scientific principles. The myth that exhaled COVID-19 viruses will “fall to the floor within 1.5m” This myth was promulgated by the WHO and apparently adopted uncritically by many leading public health practitioners, including the eminent immunologist led to an initial belief that the main mode of transmission was via contaminated surfaces and advice that disinfecting surfaces and maintaining a separation distance of 1.5m would provide a significant reduction in the risk of contracting COVID-19. Had these public health experts bothered to seek advice from air quality specialists, they would have learned that aerosols with aerodynamic diameters below 10 microns remain suspended for prolonged periods and can be transported significant distances by natural and/or mechanically-induced air movements. At least some hotels were unsuitable for quarantining COVID-19 cases Ventilation issues do not appear to have been considered (adequately or at all) in selecting hotels for quarantining potential COVID-19 cases. This failure resulted in a number of situations where the virus was transmitted from infectious individuals to occupants of other rooms and staff. Advice should have been sought from mechanical engineers on the adequacy of ventilation systems to minimise the risk of viral aerosols dispersing from individual rooms into corridors (and nearby rooms) when doors are opened (and the risk of them being distributed more widely throughout the hotels by recycling ventilation air). Monitoring CO2 within indoor areas was insufficiently promoted Measuring CO2 concentrations within indoor areas can provide a useful indication of the risk of transmission of respiratory viruses, because it provides an integrated measure of the density of people, their level of physical activity and air-exchange rates. The use of CO2 analysers should have been widely promoted, along with CO2 concentration guidelines above which the number of people should be reduced and/or air-exchange rates increased. CO2 measurements would also assist in optimising the placement of air filters within rooms. The adoption CO2 monitoring with appropriate guidelines should have been a “no brainer” for many indoor settings. 1 The overall thrust of my submission is that: (1) many senior members of the medical profession were “blinkered” when providing advice to government on appropriate responses to the COVID-19 pandemic; and (2) planning for future pandemics should ensure advice is sought from experts in relevant scientific disciplines. -oOo- 2 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0048 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0049 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0049.pdf Submission and evidence to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry Name Address Contact email Contact mob Profession. I am a registered architect I have 50 years experience with both Australian and international commissions. Principal evidence More fresh air and sunshine in the built environment should have been the regulatory response to the Covid 19 pandemic, however the opposite was the case with the introduction in 2022 of the National Construction Code, Building Code of Australia and in NSW BASIX that require smaller windows and sealed buildings. Well Known Facts Fresh air dilutes the airborne virus and sunshine kills the airborne virus as well as that on surfaces. Evidence I live and work in a building that has large openable windows that are not capable of being sealed shut. The building is not airconditioned, requires very little heating in winter. This is a proven completely Covid free household and environment. Changes to the National Construction Code, Building Code of Australia 2022 (NCC) The modifications to the NCC introduced in the 2022 version were intended to reduce the energy consumption of buildings by sealing the external building fabric (reducing fresh air intake) and reducing the amount of ultraviolet light penetration, (reducing the size of windows thus reducing sunlight penetration). The assumption is that all buildings are air conditioned. Air conditioning systems generally do not provide fresh air.The same air is circulated around and around the building and rooms within a sealed insulated building envelope. With sealed out fresh air that may require additional heating or cooling and no sunlight penetration that will require additional cooling the energy consumption of the air conditioning system is minimised. These changes to the NCC are based on European algorithms and modelling, however there i absolutely no scientific field evidence in Australia that the algorithms and modelling work in the ustralian erse environmen It is fundamental that whenever any drug or medical procedure is introduced there are extensive field trials that before that drug or medical procedure is introduced to the public. Deprivation of fresh air and sunshine is a medical procedure. There is growing evidence in European Countries and now in Australia that Covid spread more rapidly and lasted longer in communities of so-called energy efficient buildings. National Construction Code (NCC) new regulation that fails and will continue to fail to address the known requirements for healthy buildings in an on going Covid environment. "Part F6V1 Verification of indoor air quality For a Class 2,3,5,6,9b or 9c building or Class 4 part of a building, compliance with F6P3 and F6P4 (a) is verified when it is determined that the building under typical conditions in use is provided with sufficient ventilation with outdoor air such that contaminant levels do not exceed the limits specified in Table F6V1" From Table FAV1 Pollutant Carbon dioxide, COZ, maximum air quality value 850ppm (parts per million) This is fundamental for a healthy Covid free internal environment and has not changed in the current NCC. By way of background outside fresh air is about 450ppm. Evidence now suggests that where children in particular are in an environment where COZ levels exceeding lOOOppm for periods exceeding Z hours, there are links to insomnia, anti social behavior and prolonged respiratory illness including Covid. However, in the new NCC ZOZZ buildings are now required to be sealed including but not limited to; Part J5D5 Windows and doors "A door openable window or the like must be sealed- when forming part of the envelope" Part J5D7 Construction of ceilings, walls and floors. " Ceilings, walls, floors and any opening such as a window frame doorframe, roof light frame or the like must be constructed to minimise air leakage..." This is by way of contrast to similar Sars pandemic of the early twentieth century where they discovered permanent ventilation in all room in all buildings was important. In particular, classrooms, hotel rooms, nursing homes and hospitals now have sealed unopenable windows, all reliant on some obscure shared ventilation system. I have measured COZ levels in all the above after only 30 minutes occupancy. All exceeded lOOOppm some as high as SOOOppm. This at this time is not monitored or policed for compliance with the requirement not to exceed 850ppm. In my opinion in the case of nursing home wards with a permanent resident the COZ level exceeding 4000ppm contributed to the death of the resident. BASIX new regulation that fails and will continue to fail to address the known requirements for healthy buildings in an ongoing Covid environment. The online BASIX certification modelling is a requirement for all residential buildings in NSW, volume builders (project homes) and unit development. Similar to section J of the NCC, the energy use component of BASIX certification model requires a sealed building, small windows with minimum natural ventilation. As above, this modelling was never tested in the field before introduction. The COZ level of a bedroom sleeping a couple of children easily exceeds ISOOppm. The long term consequences of Covid recovery times with other behaver problems are dire. REMEDIES General requirement for corrections to construction codes for healthier building in an on going Covid 19 environment. 1) There should be a moratorium on compliance with Section J of the NCC until the current Covid outbreak has passed and there should be a moratorium until there is field evidence that air quality (CO2) levels can be maintained while still achieving the energy saving objectives. 2) There should be a moratorium on compliance with energy component of BASIX until there is field evidence that air quality (CO2) levels can be maintained while still achieving the energy saving objectives. 3) The NCC should be changed requiring the area of windows in classrooms, bedrooms, hospital wards, nursing home wards and the like, where the occupation of the room exceeds 2 hours to be no less that 50% of the floor area, half of which is easily openable by the occupants of the room. (25% of the floor area openable) Those classrooms, auditoriums that require black out and no windows should not be occupied continuously for more than 2 hours, the ventilation system should be such that the CO2 level never exceeds 850 ppm and the ventilation system has a particulate filter. 4) There should be permanent natural ventilation to all habitable rooms. The minimum permanent ventilation area should be 2% of the floor area of the room. Suggested additional reading. Journal of Building Engineering March 2021 Covid 19 and Healthy home preferences Domain, by Sue Williams. How our energy efficient homes are a breeding ground for Covid 19 Professor Geoff Hanmar, university of NSW and Adelaid. International Code Councils pandemic task force. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0049 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0050 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0050.pdf Submission and evidence to the Covid-19 response Enquiry. My Submission falls in the relevance of a Broader Health Support and concerns the Western Australia practice of not being able to have a qualified nurse, or doctor attend to a person in their home to be given a vaccination for the Covid-19 pandemic. had 5 separate occasions that required Covid-19 vaccinations, due to he There were 2 occasions when I had to cancel my wife’s appointment to get the Covid-19 vaccination due to her not being well enough to get out of bed. My wife was in a My Aged Care package at level 4 and the qualified nurse who was treating my wife on a weekly basis could not administer the Covid-19 vaccination as she was not insured by the My Aged Care company to do so. Apart from the Covid 19 vaccinations, had to be taken to the surgery for her Flu and 6 monthly injections due to thin bones. Having to go through the same worrying saga and painful episodes to my 87 years old wife and myself as husband and carer. Apparently in the mentioned instances the My Aged Care supplier and the doctors surgery,also including the local chemist can only administer injection/vaccinations on their premises to be covered by their insurance. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0050 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0051 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0051.pdf SUBMISSION Australia’s response to the recent pandemic was excessive and drachonian. It was counterproductive to mental health, especially in children. Public Health data attests to this. It was also detrimental to small business and many businesses did not survive. The registry of small business attests to this. LOCKDOWNS AND REPORTING In 2018 there were 7889 deaths from chronic respiratory disease in Australia* There were no lockdowns, no border closures, no masks or panic. Reporting COVID case numbers is not in the public interest. It is simply feeding paranoia. Before this pandemic, case numbers were not reported in the way they are now. In that year and the years previous when there were similarly high numbers there was no daily reporting of how many people had the flu. Most of the deaths were attributed to comorbidity and opportunist infection of the elderly. Everyone chose their own personal response to the threat of infection. We need to view COVID as just another element of life in a highly populated and polluted world. The high cost of the current pandemic management to mental health, the economy and the environment is ridiculously counterproductive. The Chief Health Officer Paul Kelly told a Senate Committee that 71.2% of COVID deaths to the end of October 2021 involved pre-existing health conditions such as diabetes, heart disease, lung disease and dementia. According to the WA Department of Health as of 7th February there have been 4,203 deaths classified as COVID in Australia. According to the Parliament of Australia statistics in 2018, there were 158,493 deaths in Australia. This included heart disease 17,533; dementia 13,963; influenza and cerebovascular disease 9,972; trachea, bronchus and lung disease 8586; colonic diseases 5420; diabetes 4,656; prostate disease 3264 and pneumonia 3,102. Covid Live and health.gov.au at one point both cited TOTAL Covid deaths in Australia currently at 1,102. (This figure does not indicate age categories or co­ morbidity factors.) This does not justify lockdowns with their destructive effects on mental health, social well-being and the economy. It does not justify talk of mandatory vaccination and the concomitant loss of civil freedom. https://covidlive.com.au/report/deaths https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-alerts/novel-coronavirus-2019 IMMUNISATION According to the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the Covidl9 Absolute Risk Factor is 0.88% for unvaccinated and 0.4% for vaccinated. The 95% efficacy reported by Pfizer represents only Relative Risk Reduction. The Absolute Risk Reduction from vaccination is actually 0.84%. According to ACSH natural immunity provides a relative risk rate of 20% and overall protection of 80% in those under 65 and 47% in those over 65. These figures surely justify the individual right to choose natural immunity as their preferred mode of protection. https://www.fda.gov/media/81597/download https://www.facebook.corn/nemojoneshere/videos/348748583722241 American Council on Science and Health: https://www.acsh.org/news/2021/03/24/how-protective-natural-immunity-covid-19- 1S t https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/media-resources/absolute-vs-relative-risk- reduction-understanding-the-difference-and-why-it-matters/ https://www.abs.gov.au WHO Australia must retain complete sovereign autonomy in managing any future pandemics. Australia’s response must be managed in Australia by Australian authorities. The World Health Assembly is seeking to amend its International Health Regulations to create a new international convention on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. It has been labelled the “Pandemic Treaty”. Australia is expected to be one of one hundred and ninety-four member states that will be asked to sign the treaty. Australians should not allow their Government to sign this treaty. Some of the proposed amendments include: erasing the words “with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons,” which were a clear statement of admirable intent and replacing them with “based on the principles of equity, inclusivity, coherence and in accordance with their common but appreciated responsibilities of the States Parties, taking into consideration their social and economic development” - an obfuscation that weakens the statement and allows for manipulative reinterpretation Analysis by a wide range of bodies in the past year has shown error and inconsistency were hallmarks of world wide pandemic management. There is growing evidence in mainstream medical science that vaccines were not the panacea to ensure universal health and immunity and that Covid is not the bogeyman it was feared to be. Covid-related death rates during the pandemic do not deviate from nonnal distribution data for chronic respiratory disease prior to the pandemic. * It is now well accepted that lockdowns and border closures were undeniably harmful both socially and economically. It is essential that they are used judiciously by local authorities best able to understand and monitor likely impacts. No international committee can possibly make accurate judgments for one hundred and ninety-four nations. ** Another aspect of the proposed amendments seeks power for the WHO to act on “undisclosed sources” in its decision-making and declarations. All citizens have a right to know that vested interests are not at play. Pharmaceutical companies made billions of dollars from Covid vaccinations. They were a powerful lobby voice, even deferred to as authorities during the pandemic. It is reasonable to expect that they and their shareholders will be motivated by further profit; likewise the manufacturers of surgical masks, sanitizers and all the medical paraphernalia associated with pandemic management. With this treaty the World Health Organization seeks greater access to the personal and private data of citizens in its preparation for and response to a health emergency. Why do they require this? They cannot possibly manage the populations of one hundred and ninety four countries. That is some kind of absurd corporate megalomania that would require the cooperation of every individual government and public service. WHO also seeks to “strengthen its ties to universities, government departments, and social media platforms.” This would provide leverage for them to censor any views that contradict their own. Much of what the WHO claimed was misinformation and disinfonnation in 2020 is now accepted as fact. Medical researchers and practitioners must be protected from commercial pressures and vested interests and remain free to express their professional views without threat of censorship or loss of funding. The WHO further seeks powers with respect to international travel including requirement of vaccination proof and enforced quarantining. This violates the sovereign rights of citizens from all nations. For Australians this is unacceptable. We should not accept the rule of any unelected and unaccountable body. * In 2018 the Australia Bureau of Statistics cited 7889 deaths from these diseases. The Health Department cited 4203 Covid related deaths in Australia from the beginning of the pandemic to February 2022. Australian Chief Heath Officer | ^^^^|told a Senate Committee in 2022 that 71.2% of Covid deaths involved pre-existing health conditions. ** Western Australia’s management of the pandemic was not perfect but it is a case in point for independent decision-making designed to meet the requirements of specific locations. MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE Against my belief and lifelong practice of healthy living for natural immunity, which had protected me to that point, I submitted to two vaccinations. I felt pressured to do this because I was being excluded from most of the social and family events that are important to me (eg. family birthdays and friend’s get togethers at restaurants and bars). I feel the vaccinations compromised my health, my freedom and my personal beliefs. FOOTNOTE We currently have a surge in Covid numbers in WA and the restrictions are almost negligible apart from medical centres such as hospitals. SUBMITTED 1.12.23 Stephen Faulds ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0051 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0052 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0052.pdf I'm the father of two nd hold^^^^Bposition within a company. The draconian, authoritarian, paternalistic and propagandistic approach taken by federal and state governments during the covid pandemic, particularly 'vaccine' mandates, placed our entire family under tremendous stress and anxiety, the effects of which we still feel today. It has significantly weakened our trust in public institutions that, in our family's perspective will take decades to restore. First and foremost was a complete disregard of the ethical principle over bodily autonomy. Instead the mandates left the impression that the ruling party could treat humans like cattle, to be injected at will without any recourse. And to argue that there was no "force" is disingenuous at best. Losing a sole source of income, your family home and potentially being compelled to live in the streets is indeed a brutish force. We were bullied, harassed, demonised and ridiculed on a daily basis under threat of employment dismissal for many months despite providing a very logical and factual defence. Externally it was no better, being turned away from ordering a cup of coffee to drink under a tree was just one of the sadly comical outcomes. Many may have buckled under the peer pressure, forgetting lessons learned from childhood school days to stay strong and decline. Ethics sits above science and it was deeply disturbing to see the Australian Government losing sight of this. Australia of all places, how can this be? To add insult to injury was the barrage of fear driven propaganda, censorship coupled with biased and ill experienced "fact checkers", disregard for privacy and mobility, police brutality, lack of medical independence from global interference particularly pharmaceutical and other corporates, suppression of early treatment options, disregard for actual science both established and new (including various forms of ineffective masking), failure to provide consistent context (for example age & co-morbidities), the list goes on. Some young people tragically lost their lives as a result to these ill-conceived policies and I fear that more is yet to come if and when another pandemic circulates. Can Australia at least learn from this experience, apologise for the injustices and vow never to repeat a 3 year debacle that should have never been? I hope and pray it does, along with other nations that followed similar ill-founded trajectories. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0052 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0053 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0053.pdf Submission to the Australian Government COVID19 Response Inquiry Ian Lees, parents of Katie Margaret Lees (24.9.1986 - 4.8.2021) Terms of reference we are addressing This submission addresses three of the terms of reference: o Key health response measures (TRI) o Broader health supports for people impacted by COVID19-19 and/or lockdowns (TR2) o Financial support for individuals (TR3) Who we are o We are the parents of Katie Margaret Lees, a 34-year-old writer, actor and performer who died from the AstraZeneca COVID19 vaccine at 5pm Wednesday 4th August 2021. We also represent our three remaining children, Katie’s much-loved siblings, Katie was a fit and healthy woman who decided to get the AstraZeneca COVID 19 vaccine to do her bit to end the lockdowns imposed on NSW in June 2021. She had no pre-existing medical conditions. Katie did not need the vaccine; she wouldn’t have died if she got COVID19. Katie took this action, not because she was worried about getting COVID 19, but because she was deeply concerned about the impact of lockdowns on the life of communities and the mental health of individuals. Katie said, ‘Human beings cannot be expected to live like this. ’ o Katie’s immediate family, extended family and wide network of friends are still traumatised by Katie’s unnecessary death from the AstraZeneca COVID19 vaccine. o Thank you for the opportunity share our experience. We believe there are important lessons to be learnt for the future from what we have suffered. Summary of our experience The following are the key points from the story of Katie’s vaccination and death from the AstraZeneca Vaccine. Katie has her first dose of the AstraZeneca COVID19 vaccine o Katie had her first does of the AstraZeneca vaccine on 22nd July 2021 o Katie had some headaches and developed a circular rash on the forearm of the arm she got the vaccine in. Despite advice being sent to GPs from NSW Health in early July 2021 about a rash being a sign of adverse reaction to the AZ vaccine, The Federal Government’s strategy of shifting the issues with the AstraZeneca Vaccine to the primary health carers needs to be called into question if primary health carers were not aware of, or did not implement, advice. Katie goes by ambulance to Royal Prince Alfred Hospital (RPAH) o Katie woke on Sunday 1st August with severe headache and vomiting. She was transported to RPAH via ambulance. o Katie’s brain CT scan showed severe clotting in the Cerebral Vein. The neurosurgeon stated that the location of the clotting indicated that this was caused by AstraZeneca COVID19 vaccine. Katie slipped into deep unconsciousness around 3pm and never regained consciousness. o Despite this catastrophic brain injury, undergoing subsequent neurosurgery and being on life support, due to COVID19 restrictions, we were not permitted to visit Katie until two days after she was admitted as she was still in COVID 19 intensive care, even though she tested negative to COVID 19. Katie dies from the AstraZeneca Vaccine o Just before 5pm on Wednesday 4th August, and Ian gathered around Katie’s ICU bed. Ian gave the signal to the ICUnmsetotimionKatieNliiesupport. o Katie Margaret Lees was declared dead at 4.59pm on Wednesday 4th August 2021. No official contact o Katie’s death was reported in one line on a reporting page on the TGA website on Thursday 5th August 2021. This line diluted the cause and effect of the Astra Zeneca COVID19 vaccine on Katie’s death to ‘a 34-year-old woman in NSW died following her first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine’. o On the same page as listing deaths from the AstraZeneca vaccine, the TGA website continued to say the AstraZeneca vaccine was safe. Submission to COVID Pandemic Response Inquiry-from Ian and Penny Lees 1 o There was no official mention of her death in the daily COVID19 updates. o No political or health leader initiated any contact with us. Silence, mockery, discrediting and disbelief continue to this day The death of our first-born child and eldest daughter from the AstraZeneca COVID19 vaccine has devastated our lives. If that wasn’t bad enough, we have endured ongoing PR campaigns, media reporting and commentary by politicians denying, diminishing, and discrediting our experience. Some examples include: o After Katie died, the NSW Health Minister still declared the AstraZeneca Vaccine ‘a perfectly safe vaccine’. The NSW Premier told people to ‘not be fussy’ about which vaccine they had. o My experience of the death of my daughter from the AstraZeneca COVID19 vaccine was mocked by the nurse giving me my COVID19 booster. o Members of our family were assumed to be ‘anti-vaxers’. o Our statements that Katie died from the AstraZeneca COVID19 vaccine were repeatedly questioned, edited out and watered down. o The Katie Lees Foundation, which we set up in 2023 in Katie’s honour to support female writers and performers, was initially required by a funding body to delete the statement that Katie died from the AstraZeneca vaccine because they were a ‘pro-vaccination’ organisation. o It took 9 months of approaching media to have our story told as they were concerned about implying there was something wrong with the vaccine. Documented evidence that Katie died from the AstraZeneca COVID19 vaccine Katie Margaret Lees died at 5pm on Wednesday 4th August 2021 from vaccine-induced thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (VITTS) caused by the AstraZeneca COVID 19 vaccine. Sadly, it has often been our experience that some people doubt us when we say that Katie died from the AstraZeneca COVID 19 vaccine. To establish this medical fact the evidence base is set out below: Date Data source Cause of death 1st August 2021 Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Medical Very early identification of the AstraZeneca vaccine as Records of Katie Margaret Lees. (Large file - the most likely cause of the severe clotting in the base 280 pages available on request.) of Katie's brain. Treatment path assumed this. Cause of death: Vaccine-induced thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome. 1st August 2021 Senior Intensive Care Unit Doctors and 'Katie is dying from the AstraZeneca COVID19 Vaccine'. Neurosurgeon verbal reports. 3rd August 2021 6th August 2021 NSW Vaccine Safety Expert Panel review of Vaccine-induced thrombosis with thrombocytopenia the death of Katie Margaret Lees. syndrome. (attached) 25th August 2021 Death Certificate of Katie Margaret Lees, Vaccine-induced thrombosis with thrombocytopenia (attached) syndrome Impact of Katie's death from the AstraZeneca Vaccine Health o ur remaining adult children, their partners and Ian have been emotionally, mentally and B x _ ly traumatised by the way Katie died, the lack of support from Government and the pharmaceutical industry and the alienation we feel from the mainstream narrative in our society. o Ian have both been formally diagnosed with Idue to the cause and context of Katie’s death and the lack of support. o We have engaged ongoing counselling support at our own expense. Day to day existence o Every morning, our first thought is how Katie died and the sinking feeling that we were used and discarded by our Government, by AstraZeneca and by our society. o This stays with us all day and is the last thought at the end of the day. o We are trying to get on with life and trying to shape a different life without Katie and with the indifference of our society to her death. Submission to COVID Pandemic Response Inquiry - from Ian Lees 2 Career and income o a senior executive in a major Sydney hospital but was unable to continue to work in that role due to the mental health impacts of the constant reminders of COVID19 vaccination. This has meant the loss of years of executive level income. o Ian no longer has the mental and emotional capacity to work full-time in his own business. This has reduced his income earning capacity significantly. o Our adult children have found it very difficult to sustain work performance and maintain jobs since Katie died. Social connection o We continue to feel alienated and discarded from Australian society. o We remain cynical of government and pharmaceutical industry. o We have significantly reduced capacity for social engagement. Our recommendations for government response to future pandemics Our recommendations, bom out of our horrendous and deeply painful experience of our daughter dying from the AstraZeneca vaccine are as follows: Recommendation tfl: Improve vaccine quality o Ensure vaccines are fully and thoroughly tested before being mandated to be taken by large numbers of the population. o Ensure vaccines are targeted to those who are at risk of death or disability from COVID19-19, rather than adjusting eligibility criteria to cover those, especially young people not at risk of COVID19-19 side effects, who then incurred an unnecessary risk from the vaccine. o Ensure a wider range of vaccine options than the Australian government chose during the pandemic. o Ensure there is a mechanism to rapidly learn from the experience of vaccine safety of other countries to safeguard Australians. Many European countries withdrew or limited the use of the AstraZeneca COVID19 vaccine by early 2021. We understand Denmark ceased using AstraZeneca in April 2021 and Finland limited it to over 65-year-olds after reports of blood clots. Despite this evidence, on 28th June 2021, the Australian Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, declared the AstraZeneca vaccine safe for everyone over the age of 18 years, despite ATAGI increasing the recommended age from 50 to 60. Recommendation #2: Greater clarity and honesty in communication about the vaccine o Public statements about the quality, reliability and safety of vaccines should be as clear, direct and honest so that people can make an informed decision. It was not clearly communicated that the AstraZeneca COVID19 vaccine only had Provisional Approval when it was released to the Australian community. o Devise an effective means of communicating the most up to date information to all primary health carers and have a mechanism to ensure this information is acted upon. o Ensure clarity about what informed consent is in the context of a vaccine that only has provisional approval. Recommendation #3: Immediate and substantial support for people who suffer the impact of vaccine failure. o Acknowledgement is the most important and most powerful agent of care and healing. If we had received early contact and acknowledgement from a senior politician or health leader, this would have had a significant impact on our health and our future. Therefore, we recommend the Australian Government issue a National Apology and Recognition for deaths and disabilities suffered as a result of the mandated use of COVID19-19 vaccines that were not fully developed and tested. o We recommend that a process be set up that enables deaths and severe impacts from vaccine failure to be reported to senior health and political leaders. These health and political leaders should then initiate contact with affected individuals and families to acknowledge the impact of the vaccine failure. o We strongly recommend a full review of the basis and fairness of the Australian Government Vaccine Compensation scheme including substantial increases in the amounts paid to the loved ones of someone who dies from a government mandated vaccination program. We were verbally informed by a First Assistant Secretary for the Federal Health Department, that the vaccine compensation scheme was based on the NSW Sports Injury Scheme. This is an irrelevant basis of compensation. In the end, the language of Government is money. Words can be supportive but true acknowledgement and support comes through appropriate financial support and offers of psychological support. AppendlCeS: I- Death Certificate 2- Letter NSW Health (neither to be published) Submission to COVID Pandemic Response Inquiry-from Ian Lees 3 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0053 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0054 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0054.pdf My Experience During Covid I am a the time to keep up to date on Covid matters. I am probably best informed about what is working and what is not working for the older Australians but because I have the ability and means to avoid Covid for the most part, I am much more concerned for my family and in fact for the whole of the younger generations. I find it excruciating watching while misinformed politicians/medicos act in a way that puts the whole population at risk, while they could, with very little effort, make such a difference to people's health by taking a different approach. I watch as people lose trust in Government Ministers and officials who think concealing data and pretending the disease has disappeared will placate the population, a tactic that may help people forget the disease for some time but which is ultimately counterproductive. If we pretended people didn't die on the roads that wouldn't help reduce road deaths and a virus you can track and follow is much less potent than one you are pretending is not there. While data was available I have been able to avoid a Covid infection by scheduling appointments and other unavoidable meetings when data showed the virus was low but completely isolating when the virus was prevalent. I am one of the lucky ones who had the ability to do that but nowadays with data being unavailable it is much more difficult to avoid the disease without continual isolation. My suggestions: Make the date about the prevalence of Covid publically available, maybe in a weekly basis if daily is too onerous. Biweekly is too infrequent. It doesn't have to be in the daily news, but it should be accessible to the public so they can make informed decisions. Hiding data infantalises the public and makes public officials look deceitful. You can't ask people to take individual responsibility then withhold the data that enables them to do that. Make as much data about vaccines available as possible. The government's effort was commendable at the beginning of the pandemic but it has slipped a bit in recent times. There was no information at all.abput when the new vaccines were coming until mid November. Don't be cowered by anti vaxers. The majority of the population are not swayed by them and if you don't give them air they will lose traction. Facilitate clean air in public buildings, in particular schools and health care settings. We know by now that this is an airborne disease but you wouldn't know if by looking at the advice many health departments are giving the public. Businesses should be helped to take action to make the air in their premises clean. Give better informed advice. I got aGovernment ^^^^■Ncwslcttcr today with a letter by the minister responsible^^^^^Jtelling people to wash their hands. It is inexcusable to tell ^^^^that this will protect them. The minister might not be a scientist but she should certainly be better informed than she appears to be. I have the impression that many officials think that only the^^^^^^J vulnerable are at risk when in reality everyone is one infection away from long Covid and of increased risk of the many illnesses that are Covid linked. At this point in the cycle the public should be being advised to mask in public places including mandatory masking in public transport. Someone needs to examine the reluctance of officials to properly inform people and clear away impediments. Make it easier for the to get antivirals. My personal doctor is a one-man practice without the means to do PCR tests and without enough information to know what I should do if I need them. There should be much better information about how to access antivirals in this situation. Telehealth may do this but I seldom see information about it. The minister could do so much that would be really useful in this regard. Give the public better advice. I have family members who have not been vaccinated this year and don't realise they should be. Younger ones are reluctant to continuing to vaccinate, not realising the risks with constantly changing viral strains. The government should persist with ads through tic tok etc to counteract the misinformation being put out by the antivaxers. I am not sure who is responsible for the delay in updated vaccines this year but it will result in more sickness and death than needed to be. The process of vaccine purchase needs review. The advisors I have found most informed and helpful include Dr. Raina MacIntyre, Professor Brendan Crabb and the John Snow Project. Their advice should be used to better inform our officials. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0054 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0055 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0055.pdf Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry My response addresses the following terms of reference: • Governance including the role of the Commonwealth Government, responsibilities of state and territory governments. • Key health response measures (for example across COVID-19 vaccinations and treatments, and public health messaging) I am involved in research that I have qualifications in | I am making my submission in the hope that this inquiry investigates the serious issues I raise below in order to avoid the failures that arose out of the previous COVID-19 pandemic handling. Government Overreach There was evidence of government overreach with mandated vaccinations, particularly when it came to vaccination of front-line medical workers and those involved in the service industry. Employees in both of these industries were given a stark choice between employment by getting vaccinated or join the unemployment queue if they chose the moral high ground. It is important under the context above to remember that the then Prime minister, Mr Scott Morrison said that vaccines were not mandatory (especially as they were experimental, for emergency use only and had not formally been approved by the regulator). What is particularly riling is that Queensland government ministers were exempt from vaccination and so were the Judiciary in Victoria. This shows the hypocrisy of our leadership. One rule for our politicians and one rule for the masses. Government interfered in the doctor - patient relationship Alternative treatments were unsanctioned and doctors explicitly threatened if they prescribed alternatives to the Government's wishes. I am talking about Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine used in conjunction with vitamin D, vitamin C and zinc. Such treatments when used early enough could have helped reduce the burden on our hospitals. India was able to get on top of their countries major outbreak (it was out of control with funeral pyres in every state ) by issuing to their population packets containing ivermectin, vitamin D, C and Zinc. Refer to YouTube video with additional references https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO9cjy3Rydc. Such a course of action went against the WHO recommendation at the time but it worked. I would ask the inquiry to think about this WHO action, who was behind the WHO messaging and which individual(s) and bodies were providing advice and/or funding. We have to ask the question why was government so fixated on a single treatment option that only benefited the pharmaceutical industry? There was evidence of collusion at a global scale with many countries taking a similar action, such as labelling ivermectin as horse medicine and actively discourage the use of this off label product - industry does not make any serious money from it. Even today the TGA wrongfully claims it is not useful against COVID-19. Peer reviewed research is available that provides scientific rationale to explain how it can be effective in early treatment of Covid-19. It involves in part the ACE-2 receptor - this peer reviewed publication provides more details https://www.nature.com/articles/s41429-021-00491-6 and https://www.monash.edu/discovery- institute/news-and-events/news/2020-articles/Lab-experiments-show-anti-parasitic-drug,-Ivermectin,-eliminates- 1-12 ji zl! in However, this information has been suppressed. Why? The inquiry should also investigate what role did big pharma have in blocking its use? This is a highly contentious issue with industry captured "alphabet" regulators (CDC, FDA, TGA etc.) around the world still insisting it is not effective. One also needs to look at the studies that show no effectiveness in relation to who funded the study and when the drug was administered. Ivermectin has been shown not to be effective if taken too late in the infection lifecycle. Draconian and dystopian policies Draconian lock down policies which did not work created significant but unnecessary anxiety and suffering. Prevented people from visiting family's interstate, from attending funerals of loved ones who has passed away. School children, who were not at serious risk from COVID were prevented from going to school. Whole industries were affected by lockdowns and border closures that did not stop the spread of infection and destroyed many businesses. Misinformation, Disinformation and malinformation The public was not fully informed of the vaccine risks or covid-19 health risks accurately (particularly mortality (death from covid-19) which was being overstated to push people to get vaccinated - a severe case of "fear^^|). Misinformation was, and still is rife on this subject and is not limited to the general public but with the Government and mainstream media being implicated,Fact checking sites funded by big pharma, social media giants colluding with governments to control the message. Lies and more lies were spewed forth by vested interests. No discussion and no debate which is something one would expect in countries with authoritarian regimes not a western democracy. Even today, the Government is still spruiking mRNA vaccines as safe and effective. One only needs to look at the TGA database to see this is not an accurate reflection with prominent safety signals being presented (neurological and cardiological) - refer to separate document (this was from October 2021 when I was actively monitoring the statistics), which under normal circumstances would have seen the removal of such risky products. A related but taboo subject is the unprecedented rise in excess mortality, particularly in the younger age groups. The contribution of the vaccine to this unexplained increase is yet to be fully explored and Covid-19 infections are not the sole culprit. Only now we are starting to see that there were coverups and poor testing protocols adopted by big pharma. Evidence that regulatory agencies are captured by vested interests. This has created an atmosphere of distrust that will be a hindrance for future pandemic handling unless this is addressed diligently and in a transparent manner. Discrimination Discrimination against those who were pro-choice was a major problem during the pandemic not helped by the rhetoric coming from the Government and the media, particularlyThose who chose not to be vaccinated were denied entry to social venues and vilified in the media and bullied by uninformed members of the public. In both cases, Government overreach was obvious with decisions being made that undermine democratic processes and prevent the public from having a say. We were being told that to be unvaccinated put others at risk (including people who were vaccinated which is completely unscientific - the purpose of any vaccine is to protect against a viral or bacterial agent). People who are concerned they might get infected and wanted to protect themselves could choose to be vaccinated. Any effective vaccine would have provided a high level of protection. Another major issue was the lack of government recognition of those who naturally acquired immunity through previous infection and were still required to get vaccinated which is non sensical. Government was also suggesting that vaccine immunity is superior which of course is ridiculous and has since been disproven. Vaccine ineffective! Responsible for new strains? What has since been discovered is that the gene therapy dressed up as a vaccine did not prevent infection nor did it stop the vaccinated individual from shedding the virus (when infected) and passing on to others. Rather it is claimed that it reduced the symptoms and therefore reduced the pressure on our hospital system (initially this was the case, but subsequent outbreaks became a pandemic of the vaccinated). However, being vaccinated may have also contributed to super spreader events due to an infected vaccinated person having a false sense of security, being allowed to go to public venues. Remembering unvaccinated people were barred from entering social venues in some states. Requiring people to get boosters when the boosters were not even designed for the mutated versions and had very little short-term effectiveness demonstrating ignorance and short sightedness of our decision makers. The major problem with the mRNA gene therapy is multi factorial. 1) Unlike traditional vaccines which use an inactive virus and therefore have multiple features of the original virus that the immune system can target, mRNA gene therapies produced a single feature - i.e., spike protein. Targeting this single feature becomes ineffective if the virus experiences mutations in this region. 2) The spike protein is toxic as shown in peer review research and the "vaccine" programmed our cells to create it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10452662/ 3) May contribute to what is known as "original antigenic sin" making people who are vaccinated more vulnerable to future mutated strains as we are now currently seeing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original antigenic sin Children were never at risk and should never have been encouraged to get vaccinated. Even the previous Queensland CHO, Dr Jannette Young stated this before she was ushered out of her role as CHO and "promoted" to Queensland Governor. ^^^^Byoung people who developed pericarditis after their first injection of Pfizer mRNA vaccine. Others have died who might be still alive today if they had not been injected with the experimental gene therapy. We are also now finding out that| flio make matters worse, Australia blindly followed the US. .Ay-'.''J.;:~ should never have been called a vaccine as it does not fit the 'original' definition of a vaccine. I do note that the CDC changed the definition so that mRNA injectables could be classified as a vaccine.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Hl felt insufficient testing had been performed H Early research suggested the spike protein was responsible for many of the health issues being seen in COVID-19 infected patients and here we are injecting mRNA into our bodies to create the very same spike protein. Lack of transparency and accountability The Commonwealth government signed a secret deal witi^details of the agreement were kept under wraps and away from public scrutiny under the auspices of national security. "The COVID-19 pandemic is one of the most manipulated infectious disease events in history, characterized by official lies in an unending stream lead by government bureaucracies, medical associations, medical boards, the media, and international agencies." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9062939/ Decisions made by government were not supported by sound science. World is faced with a cancer tidal wave We are now starting to hear of stories of turbo cancers https://www.ajmc.com/view/kashyap-patel-md-sees- link- between-covid-19-and-cancer-progres5ion-calls-for-more-biomarker-testing. The jury is out on whether the covid- 19 vaccine has also contributed to such events, of course, there are sites actively denying such claims - the very same sites that claimed the vaccine is "safe and effective". Who to believe when science is for sale and our government and media are in denial . Recommendations: The vaccines should always have been primarily targeted at the vulnerable people only, which includes the infirm and elderly. Even then, those who are considered to be vulnerable should have been given a choice rather than forced. It is instructive for the Government to not only taking advice from epidemiologists but to also listen to "independent [from industry]" immunologists. It is clear based on the messaging that Government twisted science to support their agenda and this needs to be investigated properly in order to rebuild trust. An inquiry into the independence and autonomy of the TGA should also be considered. Investigate who made the decisions, what were their qualifications and do they have perceived or actual conflicts of interest (with big Pharma)? Who instructed the Government to dismiss alternate, but safer treatments? What involvement did the WHO have in our Government actions? Is this going to be our future where we lose national control of our health strategies as authority is passed onto an international organisation that is accountable to no-one. WHO has been negligent in the past with handling of epidemics and pandemics, has shown to be heavily influenced from those with vested interests (industry and private foundations linked to billionaires). Safeguards need to be put in place to avoid future mishandling, undue suffering and corruption of science by vested interests especially when it comes to signing any form of pandemic treaty. De; The planned treatment by the Queensland Australian Labour Party (ALP) Government of people who are unvaccinated (to Covid-19) is immoral and unethical. In a sense, we are moving towards a medical apartheid and a dystopian society where dissent is crushed and people suffer unnecessarily. Such policies seriously violate basic Human rights, such as the right not to be experimented on (Covid-19 vaccines are experimental), the right to have freedom of movement, the right to health, the right to privacy and the right to work. The restrictions that are planned by the ALP for the unvaccinated, such as prohibiting unvaccinated people from attending social and sporting events and from using non-essential services breaches these basic human rights laws. Furthermore, to force/coerce people to take an experimental "vaccine" is explicitly in violation of the Nuremberg code. The planned restrictions will have no impact on the spread of the virus (see below). Claiming that this is all forthe common good is unconscionable and reeks of hypocrisy. I amj understandingo Using my expertise I present below clear evidence of a lack of critical thinking by many people in Government, media and the majority of the population who seem to be blindly following orders. Today, there are only a handful of cases of Covid-19 in Queensland. We have no restrictions for local residents and there have been no majoroutbreaks or problems arising from the current rules. Therefore, there is no justification for enforcing these newly planned draconian measures. As far as I can tell, there has been no discussion or debate in parliament or the media around this issue. Government over-reach is quite obvious in this case. You are a sitting member of the current ruling party and my electorates' public representative. I am hoping you can respond to the issues below surrounding the underlying assumptions behind the proposed restrictions: 1. There is a false assumption that the current covid vaccines are fully effective and that it is the only way we can geton top of this so called "pandemic." In fact, in contradiction to these claims, there are other countries with high vaccination rates (UK and Israel) that are experiencing huge 3rd or 4th waves. People who are vaccinated are still catching Covid-19, spreading Covid-19, ending up in hospital ICU and dying. In some countries it is becoming a pandemic of the vaccinated. 2. We are told that vaccine efficiency wains very quickly and a booster is required. However, boosters are unlikely to be very effective given the specificity of the vaccines (to the original (variant's Covid-19 spike protein) and the mutations that are occurring in the virus, 3. There is an assumption that the vaccines are safe. Yet we are seeing an increase in the incid i r ce of young men and boys who now have damaged hearts (i.e., pericarditis and myocarditis). I have witnessed first-hand such an event with a young and healthy^^^^^^^^^|being affected by a Pfizervaccine (firstdose), with his career now in jeopardy. Most parents remain unaware of this risk when getting their children Covid-19 vaccinated. 4. I have investigated the Therapeutics Goods Association's (TGA) database for vaccine adverse reactions, by comparing adverse reactions and death to the influenza "flu" vaccine versus Covid- 19 vaccines. What I found is very concerning: the number of Covid-19 vaccine adverse reactions are ~10times higherand deaths ~17times higherthan Flu vaccines (see data in separate document) forthe same number of inoculations The public is not being informed of this information. In a normal, sane world, these vaccineswould have been halted a longtime ago. The TGA and the Governmentcontinue to down play the seriousness of this issue, acknowledging only a small number of adverse events that can, in most cases, be treated (blood clots) and claiming, falsely, that Covid-19 vaccines are safe. 5. We have no understanding of the long-term health effects of these gene therapies because we cut short manyof thetestingand approval steps. By forcingall people to be vaccinated will mean there is no control pool to compare against, thereby preventing us from objectively evaluatingthe long-term effects to health caused by the vaccine. Will government compensate those who develop a functional impairment, immune disorder, cancer or other disease that could develop many years down the track as a result of the vaccine? I think not, due to highly restrictive statute of limitations. Government requires proof for vaccine injury compensation which will be extremely difficult to satisfy if there is a latent disease linked to the Covid vaccine. 6. Blanket vaccination of people at low risk of severe illness is likely to hamperthe development of more-robust natural immunity gained across a population from infection to deal with future variants. Instead, these current vaccines are likely to impairthe human immune system world­ wide and make the global population more vulnerable to new strains. This possibility is being suggested by eminent immunologists (instead, governments are quoting epidemiologists who are simply looking at stats that can only provide useful information ft 'the event). 7. Natural immunity is not being considered when it comes to vaccination status. Natural immunity in those who have caught Covid-19 and survived is far superior and longer lasting than that provided by the current crop of Covid-19 vaccines. Coupled with the above issues are problems with Covid-19 vaccines that are available today and include: 1. High specificity to a single feature on the virus - the S spike protein. This has resulted in pressure on the virus to mutate and escape the immune system response. Vaccines may have been highly effective against the original Covid-19 Alpha strain but are much less effective against newer strains (such as the Delta strain). Giving boosterswill not solve this issue unless the booster shots have been modified to protect against new mutated strains, which currently they are not. 2. The coding by DN^^^^^^^^^^and mRNA^^^Jforthe S spike protein is another potential problem. Peer reviewed research is suggesting that the spike protein is damaging epithelial cells and disruptingthe blood brain barrier. Manyof the pathological effects seen in Covid-19 infected patients may in fact be due to the spike protein which is also coded in the vaccines to make the same protein. This explainsthe similarity seen between symptoms of Covid and adverse reaction symptoms observed in some people who have received the Covid vaccine. 3. Doctors and nurses who are administering the vaccine are not aspirating the needle prior to injecting the vaccine into the muscle. The purpose for aspiration is to validate whether needle is in fact in the muscle or whether it has penetrated a blood vessel. Many of the more serious vaccine injuries (neurological, cardiological and gastrointestinal) are likely due to the vaccine inadvertently entering the blood stream. There is an assumption that the only way to deal with Covid-19 is via vaccination. All other medical options are not currently being considered or are being actively suppressed. Alternative treatments do exist, which have been demonstrated to be successful in randomised trials and used with great success in controlling outbreaks overseas. For example, Ivermectin, together with Zinc, and Vitamin C, and Vitamin D, have been shown to be very effective in blunting the effects of Covid-19 especially if used as a prophylaxis or early treatment as witnessed by its use in India early this year when Covid-19 was out of control. There are numerous peer reviewed science and media articles to support this claim of effectiveness (which I can provide on request). In Australia, the TGA has instructed doctors that they cannot prescribe ivermectin as a prophylaxis or use in early treatment of Covid-19 cases. Why is this effective treatment being quashed? Today, we have mainstream media and the Government spreading misinformation and relying on junk science to portray this medicine as not being useful in the fight against Covid-19. It is also presented as a 'horse de-wormer' and other emotive laden words to downplay its medicinal capabilities particularly its anti-viral properties. Safety data for Ivermectin shows side effects are significantly small. When reviewing the latest statistics available from VigiAccess, there have been reported 5,674 adverse drug reactions to Ivermectin between 1992 and October 13, 2021. This is "incredibly low" number given that 3.7 billion doses have been administered since the 1980s. Compared to the70,000+ adverse events for some 30+ million doses of Covid-19 vaccines administered in Australia. The Attorney Generalof Nebraska,recently issued a legal opinion in support of the use of Ivermectin as treatment option for Covid-19, going against what the FDA and CDC are recommending. his example demonstrates the blatant misuse of science to steer people away from using alternate modalities that are effective and push people in one direction: that all need to be vaccinated. A problem that is perhaps linked to vested interests ratherthan public health. Instead of being publicised and made available, alternatives are being rubbished by media and dismissed by what can only be best be described as govern me nt/media pseudo-science. One can only speculate that this is happening because there is no money to be made by using these alternate products, or, the terms are being dictated by pharmaceutical companies as part of their secret agreements with the Federal Government. However, such speculation and suspicion of Government motives will remain unresolved if the Government does not come clean with all the details of the agreements made. Such disclosure is being blocked by Government as it is declared to be a "national security issue", however disclosure is necessary to rebuild public trust, a trait that is clearly lacking as demonstrated by public sentiment and the recent rallies held all overthe country. Transparency and disclosure are demanded particularly when it is public funds that are being used. All Queenslanders have a right to know. Politicians are public servants (not corporate servants) who are duty boundto be answerable to the people, not the otherway around. From their inception, Covid-19 vaccines have been introduced with coercion and a lack of discussion and debate. Alternate viewpoints have not been presented fairly, particularly when they question the government narrative. The issue of vaccination status has also become very emotional. People who choose to be pro-choice are being stigmatised by the Government and mainstream media, leading to pubic shaming and bullying, which is unconscionable. When alternative viewpoints and concerns are presented, they are actively dismissed with factually challenged statements and propaganda that frame "dissenters" as wacky "anti-vaxx" conspiracy theorists or other offensive and demeaning terms. This behaviour is very un-Australian and needs to stop. People who are exercising their basic rights by choosing not to be vaccinated should not be demonised and prejudiced against, especially since the Prime Minister said the vaccine will not be mandated. Given the vaccine is not officially mandated by the Federal Government, and are proven to be ineffective in stop ping the virus (breakthrough cases), why all the coercion and bullying? Another agenda appears to be in play as suggested by all the above issues of coercion, a campaign of misinformation, an overstating of risks of the virus (especially in relation to our children), the carefully crafted rhetoric that is being pushed out across many communication channels, the unprecedent censorship, obfuscation of vaccine injuries, the one sided story, the lack of debate, the active suppression of other adjunct and active methods for controlling the virus, the denial of basic human rights with vaccine passports and secrecy behind the vaccine deals. If not another agenda, then what we are experiencing is incompetence and irrational leadership that is resulting in the dismemberment and destruction of our society. Do you as my local government member choose to be part of that leadership team? Conclusion What is clearly lacking today is open and honest leadership that puts constitutional rights, human rights, peer-reviewed science and public health first. Unfortunately, our current government is sadly failing in these areas. The dystopian plan suggested by the Queensland Labour Government has no solid justifications to support it and is not lawful. As a society we need to be respectful of people's right to choose, we need to explore other safer alternative options that are not limited to just vaccine treatments. We need to acknowledge as well as be more compassionate and supportive of those who have been injured bya Covid-19 vaccine ratherthan ignoring or down playing their side ofthe story. I requestyou dig deeper into this issue like Federal senator,^^^^^^^^^|and get back to me with what you, as my government representative, plan to do. I am available to discuss any of the points above and should you require further documentary evidence for my claims that I have made I can provide ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0055 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0056 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0056.pdf I am a retired microbiologist with I am I am alarmed at the current lack of government interest in clean air indoors. The National COVID-19 Health Management Plan (2023) did not go far enough in ensuring indoor air is safe for immunocompromised citizens. For example, it states: 1. Tf a positive COVID-19 result is received, stay home where possible, and if you must leave, wear a mask and avoid high-risk settings.’ 2. ‘All aged care homes should encourage staff and visitors to wear a face mask when indoors and in close contact with other people at a residential care home. ’ However, there is no mention of the type of mask recommended. Many Australians now wear surgical masks, which merely protect the wearer from contact with large particles (droplets and sprays). However, the Covid-19 virus is now known to be airborne and far too tiny to be ‘filtered’ by surgical masks. N95 masks are required to remove viruses from inhaled air. (N95 masks not only block small particles, they also attract them with the electric interaction, so they get stuck to the fibres.) N95 and KN95 masks were found to be 48% more effective than surgical or cloth masks (Andrejko et al, 2022). There is also no mention of ventilation or air cleanliness. Ventilation and the use of HEPA air purifiers should be mandated in any building where people gather indoors. Dr Melanie Weckert Reference Andrejko KL, Pry JM, Myers JF, et al. Effectiveness of Face Mask or Respirator Use in Indoor Public Settings for Prevention of SARS-CoV-2 Infection — California, February-December 2021. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 2022;71:212-216. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7106el ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0056 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0058 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0058.pdf ^^fwOMEN IN SUPER 15 December 2023 RE: COVID-19 Inquiry Women in Super has prepared this submission in response to the call for submissions and evidence to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry. WOMEN IN SUPER Women in Super (WIS) is a national advocacy and networking group for women employed in the superannuation and wider financial services industries. WIS advocates to improve women's retirement outcomes and access to superannuation. OVERVIEW In 2020, the previous government allowed Australians experiencing financial hardship through the COVID-19 pandemic to access up to $20,000 of their super. 5 million applications for up to $10,000 payments were approved. Data has shown that in only 14% of cases was this money used exclusively for household expenses, rent or mortgage payments, or paying off debt1. Allowing Australians to plunder their super for purposes other than retirement has disproportionately impacted women and low-income earners, and for some, their balances will never recover. Of the 2.9 million Australians who accessed their super early - the lowest income earners will be hit hardest. The bottom 20 per cent of wage earners will lose $3000 a year in retirement and have little or no change in their age pension entitlement because they will already be on the full rate2. It is estimated up to 1 million Australians wiped out their entire super savings. Industry Super Australia estimates a 30-year-old who took out $20,000 would be $80,000 worse off at retirement3. A joint analysis conducted by Women in Super and AIST in 2020 found that the gender gap in superannuation doubles for women under 34 if they have used the early release of superannuation scheme to combat financial hardship brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. Women aged 25 to 34 withdrew on average 35% of their balance, compared to 29% for men in the same age bracket. In all age brackets, women withdrew a greater proportion of their account balance when compared to men. Between ages 30 to 34 the median account balance for women is $30,129. Withdrawing $10,000 is 1/3 of the balance of the member's account, and withdrawing a second amount would leave the member with around $10,000 in their account4. This was seen in 1 Australian Institute of Family Studies, September 2021. 2 Industry Super Australia, 7 August 2020 3 Industry Super Australia, 16 March 2023 4 Hodgeson, H, 20 April 2020 Level 23, 150 Lonsdale Street, Melbourne VIC 3000 | iVis@womeninsuper.com.au | womeninsuper.com.au ^^fwOMEN IN SUPER practice in the funds, who saw members aged 18-24 withdrawing an average of 78% of their balance, and members 25-39 withdrawing 68%5. RECOMMENDATIONS Australian women were let down by this scheme, which was not analysed thoroughly on the long­ term impacts and their disproportionate effect on women and low-income earners. We strongly recommend: • A gender lens is applied to all future policy changes to ensure women do not continue to be unfairly impacted and future generations are not relegated to a retirement in poverty. Yours faithfully, Jo Kowalczyk, CEO, Women in Super CONTACT Ella Melican, PolicyAdvisor-wis@womeninsuper.com 5 Batchelor, R, August 2020 Level 23, 150 Lonsdale Street, Melbourne VIC 3000 | wis@womeninsuper.com.au | womeninsuper.com.au ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0058 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0060 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0060.pdf Date: 06.03.2022 Nicole Stokes Senior Educator Urgent Matter:Nicole Stokes- Show Cause Response Dear Mr For the avoidance of doubt, I write to you in good faith and have had assistance in preparing my response to show cause by my trade union. I apologise for the templated format of this letter and refer to your letter dated March 2nd, 2022 regarding the potential termination of my employment. I continue to assert that I am ready, willing and able to work, and refute any allegations of serious misconduct under laws relevant to my employment, such as Regulation 1.07 of the Fair Work Regulations 2009 (Cth) or any relevant State industrial relations legislation. I kindly request that you remove termination as an option and engage with myself and my appointed representatives with respect to the below. I am a loyal employee of as a Senior Educator, I have worked here for 9 years, and this is my last ‘throw of the dice’ attempt to urge restraint, to stop this process and destruction of my career and ability to make a living while I exercise my workplace rights. I assert that I have previously sought consultation from you. I have expressed my right to make a complaint or inquiry, specifically regarding occupational health and safety by making multiple requests to obtain a risk assessment relevant to my specific circumstances. 1. acts and all of the following trade unions / industrial associations, including myself as a respective members and have advised you directly of the same to protect and advance my industrial interests: 2. This generic correspondence is regrettable, but is unav and volume of members impacted. 3. I have attended meetings and have responded to comm extent it is being characterised as a discipline, show cause or in relation to any refusal to follow a lawful order meeting, this is strongly disputed as being entirely unfair and unreasonable, as there is no proper basis for that conclusion. 4. I would have been grateful for the opportunity to cons Controls and the COVID-19 vaccine requirements, within the workplace, at a departmental level. I was willing to share with you many relevant discussion points and questions regarding this complex and time pressing matter. 5. I wish to express my dismay, and convey to you that I h to engage in a meaningful degree of consultation with you, to an extent that my concerns have been satisfied. 6. As I am in essence 'flying blind’ to your position and the present me a show cause, when I have not yet been afforded an opportunity to reach a conclusive decision about the vaccine due to the lack of consultation. 7. I cannot see fit to make a decision about the COVID-19 that consultation has been afforded. I do not believe that consultation has satisfactorily been provided by merely providing me information in the form of surveys, Q&A’s, bulletins, emails, letters, and other content of like. 8. Any prompts or invitations to attend consultation mee dispute, particularly where no agenda has been stipulated, will undoubtedly generate unnecessary feelings of fear, anxiety, and/or duress to me. it cannot be contemplated by you that consultation will now be effective, unless the show cause process is completely revoked. 9. But for Victoria, I note that the public health orders are that an end to the public health order may be near. 10. The mandate simply stipulates that employers must employees who fall under this mandate, and ensure that no unvaccinated employees access the workplace in person. 11. In light of the above points, should it not be feasible to arrangements until such time as the public health order ceases to exist, offer me the opportunity to be stood down with access to my employee entitlements, or offer me an extended period of non-paid leave thus generating no greater a burden to you. 12. It is my belief that an employer is bound by a hierarchy o mitigating risks. This assessment can only be performed once a risk assessment has been completed in accordance with relevant OH&S/WH&S laws and there has been satisfactory consultation in line with my EBA and award with regard to this. 13. Any claim that a request for risk assessment and/or co influence the outcome of your decision regarding my ongoing employment cannot be sustained. This assumes that the process of risk assessment, and the opportunity to gather a deeper and more meaningful understanding of the risk to myself, will not create a change in my view of the COVID-19 vaccine. In fact, this could completely satisfy my needs and concerns as an employee. 14. Finally, it has already been determined in Australia tha satisfy an employee's need for consultation. I ask you to consider the following case: a. CFMMEU & Matthew Howard v Mt Arthur Coal Pty Ltd T/A Mt Arthur Coal [2021] FWCFB 6059. Finally, I ask you to reconsider acting with such speed to make disciplinary findings as there is no requirement under any PH Direction to terminate my employment and other options do exist. Please urgently confirm that the show cause process is stayed, and that I may continue to exercise my industrial rights surrounding dispute resolution until I can contemplate reaching a sound and secure decision about the COVID-19 vaccine. I will continue to engage with my Industrial representatives on the matter and will hope that you feel likewise inclined to involve them in further and ongoing correspondence on the matter. Kind regards, Nicole Stokes Please include the following email in all further correspondence: (A central email of and ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0060 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0061 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0061.pdf The Affect of the Vaccination Mandate on my work situation and life. I have joined the Red union because I felt that this union could help me. With guidance from the Red union I was able to ask my principal for a risk assessment and I it was very nice of her to give me feedback but it wasn't sufficient enough for myself. As for^^^^^^^^^^^^Hwas getting text messages to remind me to fill out the vaccine survey at the end of 2021 through to start pf January 2022. I was getting emails and texts to remind me to fill out the survey or I would face termination on the 7th January. I felt this coercion was not warranted and I believed having a choice to keep myself healthy by being responsible for how I approach my health for my own body was what was needed in this instance. I wish to place an injection into my body that was still at the experimental stage which may have interfered no. The way the mandating had impacted my family during 2022 year was that I didn't return to work and had to take my SICK LEAVE and LONG SERVICE LEAVE. I was not able to access CENTRELINK after the leave ran out and had to struggle on the funds that I received, ^^^^^^fhelped me through this time. My health had suffered due to the mandates by presenting as chronic anxiety and depression and having to get prescription drugs and therapy to help cope with day to day living. I was seeing a therapist once every two weeks and she was helpful in giving me useful tools to help me get through this tumultuous time. The insecurity of not having a job that I thought I would have for at least another fifteen years had the same physical and mental effects on my body as my divorce did twelve years before. As the time drew nearer to the vaccine status and possible termination of my job, I had physical symptoms of stress in the form of problems with my digestive diseases. This caused me to be weak and bed ridden for days sometimes. was quite angry at me for not getting the injection as she was not able to do things socially and we didn't have the money to do the stuff she wanted to do wit hher friends. did not know what I am going through as I did not tell her.^^^^^^H did not want me to get the injection as he was worried for my health. 2022. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0061 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0062 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0062.pdf 21 MARCH 2022 It is a beautiful, sunny Monday here at home in and as the new neighbors move in next door, I should be at school sharing my skills and passion for music and languages. After four years at university,^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ having my own children, and a lifetime of music, I have a lot to offer the younger generation. Due to the mandates in education I was terminated from my teaching position in January. Despite working at my school in a specialized role for six years, building relationships with staff, students and the community, I have been ordered not to visit campus or to talk about my termination with anyone. It feels like I have done something terribly wrong and have been ghosted by my colleagues and superiors - it’s as if I have actually died. Every time I go to the shopping mall, I worry that I’ll see students or staff and not know what to say to them. Every time I hear a new song, I imagine performing it with the students I used to teach. Every night I AM STILL DREAMING about being at school. Attending a meeting and being told “you’re not supposed to be here”. Arriving unprepared for an important concert or a class and then being told to leave or trying to sneak out. It’s a recurring nightmare. I wish the government would PLEASE end the mandates and this so-called “State of Emergency”. Anyone can catch CO VID-19 whether they have been jabbed or not and for most people, it is not a serious disease at all. had CO VID-19 earlier this month and I tested negative on both PCR tests at the beginning and end of our week in isolation. I worked extremely hard and sacrificed a lot for my teaching career. Each morning I would arrive at 7am and finish most days between 5 and 7pm. To keep my skills current, I continued working part time once both I was confident it would all pay off in the end, and I thought that it had when I was finally at a school and in a position that I loved. I was loved back by my students and got on well with their parents and my colleagues. drop off food deliveries to those same people for less than the minimum wage. I am very grateful for the work as it enables me to keep going so that I don’t sit at home crying all day in despair, sadness, and anger. To write this has been upsetting and has me once again in tears. The government of Queensland has absolutely no right to enforce a medical procedure on anyone for any reason. Especially a medical procedure that they themselves are exempt from and has death as a possible side effect! Where is the fairness in that?! I always taught kindness and understanding in my classes and now I feel that there is no kindness or understanding coming from the people who call themselves our leaders. They are not leading, they are bullying us. I know many staff in education who only got injected out of coercion to keep their job - that is not a choice at all. The government must let us live our lives and let us make medical decisions for ourselves. The science is not settled on this and yet people’s lives, careers, families, and futures have been severely negatively affected unnecessarily. Stop the tyranny, stop the fear mongering, and stop the overreach of control! Enough already. The mandates must stop so that people like me can do what we are supposed to be doing. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0062 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0063 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0063.pdf COVID -19 ENQUIRY SUBMISSION My name is I was working as an Education Assistant for a public school^^^^^H 've been doing this job I loved I had to hand in my keys as I was not willing to have the covid vaccine, number 1) I chose not to have anymore vaccinations at a younger age because I got sick after vaccination. I did some research and it wasn't proven to be safe or effective. ) I watched an Oracle film titled 'Safe and Effective: A second opinion' that describes the harm people had suffered because they believed the governments narrative that this experimental injection was a 'vaccine' instead of an untested genetically modified mRNA drug. I went to my family Dr in ^^^^^^^^^asking for informed consent, the dr could not give me informed consent. did not choose this. As December was coming up, I knew what was coming with the no jab, no job policy playing out, I then went to another Dr as he was giving out exemptions. He took my blood tests for a nd I was to be given an exemption on my next visit which gave me peace of mind that I would still have my job that I love. When I called for my blood results and next appt the surgery told me that this particular Dr had been suspended hence I could not get an exemption, I later learnt that he was suspended for supporting people with their own health decisions. I was not allowed on the school premises and was left without a job, no discussion, nothing even though I sent numerous letters, had no reply from anyone in the education department. Then out of the blue^^^^^^^^^H I had a phone call I can go back to work, phone call was a Friday I went back to work on the Monday into a position I was not qualified for. Had no handover just a quick meeting. I was out of my depth being put in a position with a different pay grade and job title^^^^^H I ended up feeling quite ill with not knowing what I was doing, had no support etc dealing with I was not equipped for. I ended up going to people sense for counselling through all the stress I was put through that year. This year 2023 I had a traumatic experience at work again as I was in fight/flight mode. Ive had to go on sick leave. All because I chose not to have a vaccine, my world was turned upside down. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0063 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0064 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0064.pdf Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry Given the limit on submission length, I've focused primarily on the Federal Government's key health response measures to the COVID-19 pandemic. It was challenging to keep to the 3-page limit given the extent and severity of the Morrison Government's failures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Key findings The Morrison Government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic has been broadly criticised. Many of its failures related to lack of transparency and outsourcing of vital government responsibilities. Key pandemic public policy failures that fell within the remit of the Federal Government included: - Lack of preparedness for a global pandemic. - Failure to enact appropriate quarantine plans. - Inadequacy of diagnostic services during peak infection periods. - Delays in the procurement and rollout of vaccines, with failure to adequately prioritise the vaccination and care of vulnerable groups. - Failure to adequately address community concerns regarding side-effects of vaccinations against COVID-19. - Errors in the procurement of PRE, resulting in wasted money and resources. - Delays in the provision of PRE, especially to healthcare professionals. - The psychosocial impact of prolonged lockdowns on Australian children- specifically, youth mental health, increases in school refusal and educational outcomes. - Errors in planning, procurement and provision of diagnostic services (PCR and RATs) to the public. - Faltering public confidence in vaccination and the failure to combat widespread public misinformation. - Failure to adequately address the burden and impact of long COVID. - Failure to map out a plan for further COVID vaccination schedules, and for management of future significant outbreaks should they occur. Specific issues: Vaccine rollout The Morrison Government's performance in procurement and distribution of vaccines for COVID-19 has been described as 'the worst national public policy failure in modern Australian history'.1 The Senate Select Committee on COVID-19 concluded: To date, the Australian Government's response has been characterised by poor preparation, a refusal to take responsibility and provide national leadership-including in areas of clear Commonwealth constitutional responsibility—a failure to learn lessons as the pandemic progressed... with, at times, catastrophic consequences.2 Described by Prime Minister Morrison as "not a race", the vaccine rollout in Australia began months after that in the UK and the USA and did not adequately prioritise vulnerable groups. Sadly, that delay resulted in increased case numbers and deaths. Key aspects of the COVID-19 vaccine rollout were outsourced to privat^ompanies^^Hreceived contracts worth over $11 million,more than $14 m ill ion. - which was one of the then-Government's biggest donors - also received funding to run the vaccine rollout, whil^■conducted a 'readiness review' of 'Australia's preparedness for a vaccination program'. The government was slow to procure personal protective equipment (PPE), and there were multiple instances of government procurement of PPE which subsequently failed regulatory requirements. 1 Over-reliance on COVID-19 testing via pathology providers was a key contributor to the widespread delays in COVID-19 screening and testing results during peaks in infections. The presentation of the highly transmissible Omicron variant in Australia, coinciding with a relaxation of public health restrictions, led to a surge in COVID-19 cases in late 2021 which swamped the PCR testing system. Although rapid antigen tests for self-testing were rolled out internationally from mid-2020, they were not approved for use in Australia until the end of 2021. There were widespread shortages of RATs from January 2022. On several occasions the Federal Government placed orders with suppliers who failed to deliver or who delivered unapproved test kits.3,4 Other key aspects of the Government's COVID-19 response were also outsourced. Private companies received tens of millions of dollars to run testing centres, deliver PPE, immunise aged-care residents, and deliver strategic planning advice. The widespread failures of the COVID-19 response raise questions as to why the Federal Government's Health Department was unable to undertake these actions. Management of COVID-19 outbreaks Australia had one of the highest rates worldwide of aged care deaths as a proportion of total deaths from COVID-19. Key aspects of the Commonwealth Government's management of COVID-19 outbreaks at aged care facilities were outsourced. For exampleH^^^^^^^H was awarded more than $1 billion worth of pandemic-era contracts, including $15.6 million to provide emergency response teams to outbreaks at aged care facilities — teams which were subsequently criticised for lacking appropriate skills.5-6 Immunisation and vaccine reactions The Inquiry should examine the means, timeframe of and rationale for Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI)'s pandemic decision-making. The basis of ATAGI's decisions should be made clear to the public and to medical clinicians at the time they are released. An appropriate model is that used by the US CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunisation Practices. There were suggestions during the pandemic that political pressure had been placed on ATAGI by the Federal Government (on one occasion, Prime Minister Morrison stated that he had made a "constant appeal" to ATAGI to reconsider its stance on one of the COVID vaccines).1 The appearance of political interference during the pandemic contributed to public loss of faith in both the^^^^^^J vaccine and in ATAGI's recommendations around vaccinations. Separately, adverse effects of the vaccines were not well communicated to the general public; messaging around this contributed to mistrust of the system. Constituents also reported unreasonable delays and rejection of claims by the COVID-19 Vaccine Claims Scheme. Long COVID The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Health, Aged Care and Sport published its report: Sick and tired: Casting a long shadow. Inguiry into Long and repeated COVID infections in April 2023.7 Minister^^^Hhas not yet formally responded to that report, and its key recommendations have not been acted upon. These include: - The establishment of a nationally coordinated research program for COVID-19 and long COVID research. - That the Department of Health and Aged Care updates, focusses, and improves its COVID-19 vaccination strategy. 2 - That support and education should be provided to help general practitioners (GPs) and other primary healthcare providers to diagnose and manage long COVID. - That funding be provided for selected public hospitals to develop multidisciplinary long COVID clinics. - That the Federal Government establish an advisory body to oversee development of national indoor air quality standards. - That the Federal Government consider a comprehensive summit into the COVID-19 pandemic and Australia's past and current response, including by governments at all levels, with particular consideration to the role of the future Centre for Disease Control. Recommendations The Senate Select Committee on COVID-19's 2022 report made clear and cogent arguments for holding a Royal Commission into the subject of Australia's COVID-19 response. If a Royal Commission is not to be held, the current Inquiry must report on all aspects of our national government's handling of COVID-19, including: pandemic preparedness; procurement of testing services, vaccines and PPE; provision of healthcare during the crisis including testing, tracing, isolation, and measures to stop viral spread, including clean air measures; management of aged care and other vulnerable communities; quarantines and lockdowns. Other than the health measures, the Federal Government's stimulus package and economic response, including the changes made to superannuation regulations during COVID and their long­ term effect on the most vulnerable Australians, should also be scrutinised The Inquiry must also examine the short- and long-term impacts of COVID, including long COVID, the psychological impacts of lockdown, the effects on our healthcare workforce, and the long-term impact on secondary and tertiary educational outcomes for young Australians. It should address the inequities in health care and educational outcomes in the economically disadvantaged. It should compare our COVID-19 response with that of similar nations worldwide; what we did well, and what we could have done better. It should make appropriate recommendations regarding preparedness for future outbreaks of COVID and other pandemics. Climate scientists foreshadow more pandemics in our near future. We must examine this critical time in our very recent past with transparency and honesty. Dr Monique Ryan MP References: 1. Duckett (2022) 'Public Health Management of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia: The Role of the Morrison Government', International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2. Senate. Select Committee on COVID-19. In Final Report; Senate: Canberra, Australia, 2022 3. Knaus and Smee (2020) 'Australian government sought to buy 500,000 Covid-19 test kits from company now under investigation', The Guardian. 4. https://www.tga.gov.au/news/media-releases/promedical-equipment-fined-63000-alleged-unlawful-advertising-covid- 19-rapid-test-kit 5. Lucas and Schneiders (2020) 'Medical firm with ex-health minister as lobbyist wins $1.2b of work', The Age 6. Four Corners episode 'Profiting from the pandemic', originally aired 2nd May 2022. 7. House of Representatives. Parliamentary Standing Committee on HACS Report. Sick and tired: Casting a long shadow. Inquiry into Long and repeated COVID infections. Canberra, Australia 2023. 3 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0064 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0066 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0066.pdf 25/10/2021 I write regarding the matter of potential covid vaccine and my desire to be fully informed and appraised of ALL facts before going ahead. I'd be most grateful if you could please provide the following information, in accordance with statutory legal requirements. 1. Can you please advise the approved legal status of any vaccine and if it is experimental? 2. Can you please provide details and assurances that the vaccine has been fully, independently, and rigorously tested against control groups and the subsequent outcomes of those tests? 3. Can you please advise the entire list of contents of the vaccine I am to receive and if any are toxic to the body? 4. Can you please fully advise of all the adverse reactions associated with this vaccine since its introduction? 5. Can you please confirm that the vaccine you are advocating is NOT experimental mRNA gene altering therapy? 6. Can you please confirm that I will not be under any duress from yourselves as my employers, in compliance with the Nuremberg Code? 7. Can you please advise me of the likely risk of fatality, should I be unfortunate to contract Covid 19 and the likelihood of recovery? 8. Can you please advise me if I were to experience any adverse reactions is the manufacturer of the vaccine liable? If the manufacturer isn't liable will the company, I'm currently employed with be responsible & liable as it is their request that I have the vaccine to carry on my employment? I also request risk assessment that shows an unvaccinated person is a threat and more risk than a vaccinated person being at the workplace. (A risk assessment is required by law and must be done at the actual workplace! Not at some high up bosses office). * ask for the vaccine MSDS, (it is law for the workplace to provide a MSDS). * ask your employer to provide substantial scientific evidence to prove the vaccines are safe, effective and necessary - in those exact words (as the TGA was asked this but couldn't provide it). Once I have received the above information in full and I am satisfied that there is NO threat to my health, I will be happy to accept your offer to receive the treatment, but with certain conditions - namely that: 1. You confirm in writing that I will suffer no harm. 2. Following acceptance of this, the offer must be signed by a fully qualified doctor who will take full legal and financial responsibility for any injuries occurring to myself, and/or from any interactions by authorized personnel regarding these procedures. 3. If I should have to decline the offer of vaccination, please confirm that it will not compromise my position and that I will not suffer prejudice and discrimination as a result? I would also advise that my inalienable rights are reserved. Should I be dismissed, due to my decision, I request the company to give me a letter with my co­ ordinators name, managers name, CEO, COO and CFO's name. The organisations name, my name, and the date of said decision as a dismissal if I'm not vaccinated. I will then seek legal action and involve Fair Work. As you may be aware Work Safe is at State Level, Fair Work is at Federal Level. A formal complaint will be put in order. State that you stand to lose your job as of Dec 1 and the following information: This 'mandate' breaks the following: - The Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Article 23: Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment - The Australian Government's Immunisation Handbook under Section 2.1.3 Valid Consent, it states that for consent to be legally valid "It must be given voluntarily in the absence of undue pressure, coercion or manipulation." - The UNESCO statement on Bioethics and Human Rights, Section 1, Article 6 states "Any preventative diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason, without disadvantage and without prejudice" ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0066 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0067 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0067.pdf AMNESTY INJUSTICE- INTERNATIONAL DEFENDING HUMAN RIGHTS 4 December 2023 AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL AUSTRALIA ABN 64 002 806 233 Contact Name: Ry Atkinson Street address: Postal address: 79 Myrtle Street Locked bag 23 Number:| Chippendale Broadway Email: I NSW 2008 NSW 2007 W: www.amnesty.org.au Amnesty International Australia Submission to the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry Amnesty International is a global movement of more than 10 million people who take injustice personally. We campaign for a world where human rights are enjoyed by all. We help to bring torturers to justice, change oppressive laws, and free people who have been jailed just for voicing their opinion. We speak out for anyone and everyone whose freedom or dignity are under threat. We are impartial and independent of any government, political persuasion or religious belief and do not receive funding from governments or political parties. Amnesty International is a proud People Powered movement founded on the work of volunteers and activists all around the country. More than 500,000 Amnesty International supporters live in Australia. Amnesty International Australia (AIA) welcomes the opportunity to make a submission to the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet regarding the Commonwealth Government’s COVID-19 Response Inquiry. As an organisation, Amnesty International has worked extensively over the past four years campaigning for the equitable distribution of pandemic related products around the world, with a particular focus on the role that international trade rules played in slowing the speed on the global response to COVID-19, and therefore Australia and other countries' access to these products. Beyond this, AIA has primarily focused on the human rights implications of international border closures on Australian citizens along with the impact of ‘blanket’ vaccine mandates across Australian jurisdictions. In this respect, this submission will have three areas of focus: 1. Intellectual property rights and access the pandemic related products; 2. Human rights impacts of border closures on Australian citizens; and 3. Human rights impacts of vaccine mandates. Intellectual property rights and access the pandemic related products In June 2022, the World Trade Organization (WTO) announced the adoption of a ‘partial’ waiver of the WTO’s Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement. However, rather than waive intellectual property protections as the original drafters of the TRIPS waiver had intended, it merely provided some clarifications to current “flexibilities” and a narrow exception to an export restriction on COVID-19 vaccines for the duration of five years.1 As Amnesty stated at the time, this decision was unlikely to make a significant difference in global access to COVID-19 vaccines, and the fact that the WTO decided to postpone by six months the 1 Amnesty International, ‘Covid-19: WTO ministerial decision on TRIPS Agreement fails to set rules that could save lives,’ June 17 2022, available at https://www.amnestv.orq/en/latest/news/2022/06/covid-19-wto-ministerial-decision-on-trips-aqreement-fails-to-set-rules-that-could-save-lives/ decision around extending the agreement to cover diagnostics and therapeutics - a decision that has still not been made - highlights how ineffective the WTO has been regarding this issue.2 These decisions and delays are not only a hollow response to COVID-19, but sends the message that intellectual property rights outweigh the rights to health and life, setting a worrying precedent for international cooperation in future public health emergencies. AIA welcomed the bipartisan support in Australia for the original TRIPS waiver,3 but remains disappointed in the failure of this support to materialise in active promotion of the TRIPS waiver and its key provisions in international forums, including the current negotiations underway concerning the Pandemic Treaty.4 Governments have an obligation to ensure that health facilities, goods, and services, including medicines, are available, accessible, acceptable and of good quality - to everyone, without discrimination, irrespective of where they live or their income. Access to COVID-19 vaccines that are safe and effective is therefore an essential element of the right of everyone to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, including in Australia. It is no secret that Australia’s vaccine rollout faced serious delays, and that was in part due to a global shortage of vaccines. In this respect, vaccine producing companies played a decisive role in restricting fair access to a life-saving health product by monopolising intellectual property and blocking technology transfers.5 There is still time - particularly concerning diagnostics and therapeutics - to right the wrongs of this pandemic when it comes to intellectual property rights, and AIA would urge this Inquiry not to overlook the importance of this matter when it comes to policies that support Australians. Human rights impacts of border closures on Australian citizens During the pandemic, there were thousands of Australians stranded overseas, unable to come home due to travel restrictions related to COVID-19.6 This included many families that were separated, and others unable to be with sick and dying relatives. Leaving people stranded overseas is a breach of their human rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that everyone has the right to return home to their country, and shall never be deprived of the right to enter their own country. This situation was further exacerbated in 2021 when the then Australian government introduced an Amendment Determination to the Biosecurity Act 2015 that removed the automatic exemption for 2 Amnesty International, ‘Proposed Delay on TRIPS Extention Slammed,' 15 December 2022, available at https://www amnestY orq au/proposed-delaY-on-trips-extension-to-include-covid-19-treatments-and-tests-slammed-bv-alliance-of-health-human-riqhls-and-fair-trade-orq anisations/ 3 Amnesty International, Amnesty Welcomes Australia's Support for the TRIPS Waiver to End Vaccine Monopolies,' 9 September 2021, available at https://www.amnestv.org.au/amnestv-welcomes-australias-support-for-the-trips-waiver-to-end-vaccine-monopolies/ 4 Amnesty International, Joint Public Statement: The Pandemic Treaty Zero Draft Misses the Mark on Human Rights,' 24 February 2023, available at https://www.amnestv.orq/en/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/IOR4064782023ENGLISH.pdf 5 Amnesty International, A Double Dose of Inequality: Pharma Companies and the COVID-19 Vaccine Crises,' 2021, available at https://www.amnestv.orq.au/how-we-could-have-avoided-the-omicron-variant-with-fair-and-equal-access-to-vaccines-around-the-world/. See also, Amnesty International, ‘Money Calls the Shots: Pharma's Response to the COVID-19 Vaccine Crises,' 2022, available at https://www.amnestYorq/en/documents/pol40/5140/2022/en/ 6 Amnesty International, ‘Stories of the Stranded Aussies: A Case to Bring Them Home,' 2020, available at https://www.amnestYorq.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Stories-of-the-Stranded-Aussies.pdf 2 Australian citizens and permanent residents ordinarily resident in a country other than Australia, to leave Australia without exemption upon return.7 While AIA well understands the need of the Australian government to protect the right to health of the Australian community, this objective can and could have been achieved through a more balanced approach. Human rights are not mutually exclusive. Human rights impacts of vaccine mandates While there are legitimate public health reasons to aim for as many people as possible to be vaccinated, governments must not impose blanket vaccination mandates and should seek to ensure that vaccination is with full consent. Not doing so has the potential to infringe upon human rights for two key reasons: 1. All individuals have the right to prior, free and informed consent for any medical procedure including vaccination. This means people have the right to choose whether or not they wish to be vaccinated; and 2. Blanket mandates do not take into account specific contexts and the circumstances faced by particular populations. As a result, blanket mandates can have a discriminatory and disproportionate impact upon some groups, such as Indigenous communities who may not trust health authorities due to historical marginalisation and abuses in clinical studies. For these reasons, governments should always focus on increasing voluntary uptake, rather than imposing mandates on COVID-19 vaccines. To achieve this, governments should provide accurate and evidence-based information, in formats that are accessible to everyone, about the availability, necessity and effectiveness of vaccinations. International human rights law allows for certain rights to be limited under specific circumstances where it is provided by law, and it is necessary and proportionate to a legitimate aim, such as the protection of public health. This means that there are some limited exceptions that may allow governments to impose targeted vaccine mandates under particular circumstances. These requirements include situations where people are not forced to be vaccinated, but their employment, freedom of movement or entry to certain venues may be contingent upon an immunisation requirement. In these cases, additional human rights, such as the right to decent work, also are at stake and need to be taken into account accordingly. The Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation of Provisions in the ICCPR provide specific guidance on when and how restrictions to human rights may be implemented.8 In the case of Australia and across states and territories, AIA raised specific concerns with relevant Ministers across these jurisdictions regarding the possibility of using less restrictive measures as well as a lack of timelines with no scope for periodic review where mandates were in place. It is with great disappointment that AIA notes a lack of engagement on these issues from the Ministers in question. 7 Amnesty International, “Stranded Aussies: Travel Ban Determination,’ 21 August 2021, available at https://www.amnesty.org.au/stranded-aussies-overseas-travel-ban-determination/ 8 UN Commission on Human Rights, ‘The Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation Provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,’ 28 September 1984, available at https://www.ici.orq/wp-content/uploads/1984/07/Siracusa-principles-ICCPR-leqal-submission-1985-enq.pdf . 3 4 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0067 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0068 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0068.pdf 4th December 2023 To The COVID-19 Response Inquiry Panel, I wrote a letter back in August of 2021 and sent it to a number of both State and Federal Parliamentarians. Reading back through the letter brought back traumatic memories of the absolute reign of tyranny citizens of Australia faced during the Covid-19 pandemic, as a direct result of Government intervention and policies. In this submission I will outline some key points that I believe highlights the utter failure of our Government to adapt to new data and evidence and preserve fundamental human rights during the course of the pandemic. 1. Government failed to refer to existing documentation around pandemic preparedness and instead created panicked "solutions" on the run such as locking down all citizens, which never formed part of any prior recommendations. 2. Failure to adapt to real life data and instead continued to develop policies based on inaccurate modelling. For example the average age of a COVID-19 death in Australia was higher than the average life expectancy. There was a 97.7% recovery rate across Australia (as at July 2021). These statistics were ignored and instead case numbers were the focus which lead to disproportionate interventions. 3. Shutting down parliament for a significant period of time so no debates or democratic processes could take place. 4. One dimensional approach to the fanciful idea of eradicating Covid-19 which inevitably lead to consequences that were far more problematic than the disease. For example, the significant rise in mental health related concerns due to the complete and devastating isolation during lockdowns. On Monday 16th August 2021 Lifeline reported 3,436 calls in one-single-day. The highest daily number of phone calls in their history. Worst still, the flow on effects to mental health are still seen today. Another consequence of the lockdowns was where small family businesses were demolished while multinationals and big corporations thrived under lockdown policies. Families never recovered financially and recently pressure has been exacerbated by the increased cost of living. 5. Citizens were commanded to "stay at home", "work from home", "only leave for essential reasons" and yet our Prime Minister left Australia to meet with world leaders for the G7 Summit. Why couldn't this have taken place online? Hypocritical leadership that has no right to determine what is and isn't essential when it comes to being able to make a living to put food on the table and a roof over your families head. 6. Turned a blind eye to experts and other places around the world that provided alternate strategies to lockdowns. For example, the demonisation of the warnings and suggestions outlined in the Great Barrington Declaration despite thousands of experts signing on worldwide. Countries and places such as Sweden, South Korea and Florida allowed life to proceed whilst managing the virus. Sweden never locked down, never forced a business to close, never implemented mask mandates or caps on gatherings. They simply encouraged people to take responsibility for themselves, keep their distance where possible and protect the most vulnerable. Sweden's approach was constantly ridiculed by the self labelled 'trustworthy' media as "...an example of how not to handle the COVID-19 pandemic" but as the data showed, this was far from the truth. 21 out of 30 countries across Europe had higher excess mortality rates than Sweden in 2020 and their case numbers continued to stabilise. At the end of July 2021, their daily rolling average COVID-19 death toll was ZERO. 7. Failure to respond to the overwhelming number of adverse reports (TGA) due to the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccines. The most responsible decision would be to shut the rollout down. 8. Refusal to pay compensation to people who were injured by the vaccines via the compensation scheme. (Read more here: https://gerardrennick.com.au/tga-are-the- culprits-again-rejecting-vaccine-compensation-claims/) 9. Abusing the sanctity of the doctor/patient relationship. The federal government enabled this by allowing business and other places to gain access to private medical information for example, vaccination status. 10. Deprived citizens of effective early treatment options. There are a number of other examples but these were the most prominent in terms of their impact to fundamental human rights and citizens freedom. Thank you for taking the time to read and I hope it provides some points of deep reflection. I look forward to hearing the results from the inquiry and hope that it shapes policies in a more just way should there be another situation like this in future. Regards, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0068 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0069 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0069.pdf My name I was a Theatre Technician working) I worked through COVID Pandemic in^^^^|prior to the mandate. We intubated patients requiring to be placed on respirators over night in Theatre. This was before fit testing was a requirement and available. I have a very small face and we only had large N 95 masks that were not air tight on my face. Even though Covid -19 highly contagious and I was exposed to the sickest patients, I still to this day have not have a case of COVID-19. I saw patients wheeled into theatre prior to the infection control overhaul with garbage bags on their heads to prevent the spread of COVID-19. The garbage bag was open at the shoulders and the patients exhaling was not contained. It was senseless, pointless and sad to see. I was stood down before mandate due to working night shift. I started my shift before midnight. I was assured I would be paid as normal, but that didn't happen. I left the state for work. I've had a lot of career changes since I was lawfully dismissed because I'd rather wait until the clinical trial vaccine had more results. Pfizer formula has been changed since it's release. In the law does say you need to pay people to participate in a clinical trial and not to coerce them into it to keep their job. I moved tofor work after some time in^^H I've worked in a was as satisfying or rewarding as my role as a Theatre Technician. I decided to be vaccinated in^^^^^^^^^o return to work in^^^^^H. I can't return to my role as a Theatre Technician until next year after the minimum more than 6 months required between vaccines has passed. I received the Nova Vaccine I intend to receive the booster in March when I am legally allowed. I was unaware of the progress of the mandate policy in hospitals in^^^^Hwhile I was out of state. I was interviewed for a position in hospital when I returned thinking that I was fully vaccinated. I received and offer and it was rescinded due to the policy of 3x vaccine prior to on boarding. I am not fully vaccinated until I am boosted. At this time feel the 3x vaccine mandate is as senseless as the garbage bags on patients heads that were open around the shoulder still leaking infections air. Please revise the current policy for newly vaccinated people. I understand that people who are only just receiving their first and second dose should not exist in ^^^^^Hunless they are under 18, but people do change their minds for the love of their careers. I remember when the vaccine was being given in primary schools and now it's not advised for under 18's. Revisions can be made. Please make an acception for the revision of this policy made in 2022. Hospitals get accreditation from the government. That's ultimately where the decisions are coming from. Kind regards, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0069 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0071 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0071.pdf COVID-19 Inquiry - Public submission by Krystal Ha Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission and share my views and experiences about the Government’s COVID-19 response. As a young Australian, I feel like I was especially impacted by COVID-19. It impacted my education and relationships and it felt as if my demographic - for social and economic reasons - was less well-equipped than many others to handle the hardships. While the experience has given me a range of views about the ways government can support individuals and communities - even the best-managed pandemic will have terrible consequences. I think the main goal should be pandemic prevention. It seems to me that Australia’s governments invest heavily in hazard reduction for other natural disasters and are increasing their efforts because of climate change. But I’m not aware of any similar investment in reducing the likelihood of pandemics, even though the risk to the average Australian seems much higher. In that context, I’d like to raise a few issues that I think are important and could make sure we’re heading in the right direction. My points address the following Terms of Reference: • Key health response measures (for example across COVID-19 vaccinations and treatments, key medical supplies such as personal protective equipment, quarantine facilities, and public health messaging). • Broader health supports for people impacted by COVID-19 and/or lockdowns (for example mental health and suicide prevention supports, and access to screening and other preventive health measures). • Support for industry and businesses (for example responding to supply chain and transport issues, addressing labour shortages, and support for specific industries). Indoor air quality could make a big difference, and could be improved by adopting emerging technology such as far UV-C I believe that the Australian government should create clear codes of practice and standards for indoor air quality (IAQ) and introduce regulations for high-risk spaces. Every year, Australians fall ill as a result of exposure to airborne pathogens in indoor environments. Some of the most vulnerable members of our community, the elderly and immunocompromised, are particularly exposed to this risk. Better controls on IAQ would not only help protect us against current and future pandemics, but they can also reduce the negative health outcomes caused by other hazards like indoor smog, toxic materials, non-pandemic respiratory diseases, and other known airborne health hazards. Despite Australians spending at least 90% of their time indoors, the Australian Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water highlights that Australia has no specific controls on IAQ aside from the limited control specified by Safe Work Australia. Without nationalised standards and codes specifying minimum performance requirements for infection control, I worry that the nation will default to ineffective interventions that provide little protection against pathogens. Clear and effective codes of practice and standards for IAQ Australia would provide clear metrics and targets for air quality with the goal to reduce pathogen transmission. Without clear metrics and targets, I worry that manufacturers and innovators will create products that are ineffective at cleaning indoor air to suitable levels to reduce pathogen transmission. Evidence-based standards for IAQ which are informed by the latest scientific research into respiratory disease, air filtration and sanitation, public health, and behavioural science would provide the correct regulatory environment to ensure effective IAQ interventions are available to the Australian public. Additionally, clear requirements should be specified for high-risk environments in which airborne infections are potentially life threatening such as in aged care facilities, hospitals, healthcare facilities, and other facilities caring for the immunocompromised. The Lancet COVID-19 Commission Task Force has proposed Non-infectious Air Delivery Rates (NADR) so we now have measurable goals for ventilation and filtration targets that protect against infectious disease transmission. The Task Force highlights that, while there is ongoing scientific debate over what metrics and targets are optimal, there is agreement that current practices are insufficient. I recommend that the Inquiry read the report to gain a better understanding of the considerations in setting effective codes and standards for IAQ IAQ codes and standards could be defined by the Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB) in the National Construction Code. The ABCB could draw on the expertise of the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care and the Australasian Health Infrastructure Alliance (AHIA), as well as the existing IAQ work done by the ABCB. ASHRAE Standard 241, Control of Infectious Aerosols may also be helpful in informing codes and standards. I believe that clearer codes of practice and standards for IAQ can help safeguard all Australians against airborne pathogens in indoor environments. With the right regulatory environment we can reduce the spread of pathogens, reduce the burden on our public health system, and safeguard the most vulnerable members of our community. In a worse pandemic, next-generation PPE may be essential to keep critical infrastructure functioning. In a paper |called “Electric Power Grids Under High-Absenteeism Pandemics: History, Context, Response, and Opportunities” they explain that the electric power systems, which modern society relies on, drive interdependent services, such as water systems, communication networks, transportation systems, health services, etc. They argue that modern power grids require constant attention in such a way that a health emergency that limits the available workforce could cause a cascading collapse. Addressing Terms of Reference one, two and six requires addressing this challenge. They argue that COVID-19 was unlike many other historic pandemics because the majority of deaths occurred in people over 65, while the majority of employees essential to the continued operation of the power grid are under 65. If a future pandemic was more severe in a younger age group, it could lead to cascading failures of critical infrastructure in a way that wasn’t possible without highly optimised (and hence brittle) modern infrastructure. That fact leads them to argue that safeguarding the nation’s power grid in the face of rapidly evolving outbreaks is among the top priorities. On that basis, I recommend that the Inquiry recommend that the Office of Supply Chain Resilience, the Home Affairs Critical Infrastructure Centre and the National Emergency Management Agency collaborate on preparation and response planning for a pandemic that interrupts supply chains and causes workforce shortages in critical infrastructure sectors. Both^^^^^^^fand a separate paper by Gopal et al titled “Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics” provide practical detail on what this might look like. This includes ensuring that power generators, transmission providers and distribution providers have robust pandemic plans and the ability to provide high-quality PPE and other safeguards to their workers during a crisis. Given the importance of generating confidence in the workforce, the Government’s plans and exercises need to include the industry and be transparent to the public. The notable public health challenges of history have been solved by innovative people bringing new ideas and perspectives to the challenge of health. As the scope of public health has grown, so has its ability to improve longevity and quality of life. The terms of reference of this inquiry are fundamentally about doing better in the future. Given how terrible future pandemics could be - the best thing the Inquiry could do for the future is to prioritise pandemic prevention, including the novel ways pandemics could occur in the future. While that will require uncomfortable thinking about unexpected topics and emerging technologies, these are the issues that could have the biggest impact towards securing a healthier future. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0071 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0072 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0072.pdf COVID-19 Response Inquiry Submission Sear; L-wrer;. < Hi'' Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission and share my views and experiences about the Government’s COVID-19 response. My key message is the overriding importance of efforts to prevent future pandemics. Perhaps more than any other kind of catastrophic risk, it’s within our power to prevent novel pathogens from emerging and to quickly identify, contain and eliminate them if they do. Given the enormity of human and economic costs of pandemics - and that pandemics much worse than COVID-19 are possible - prevention should be our primary goal. I think preventing pathogens from emerging and controlling them if they do should be top priorities for the new Australian Centre for Disease Control. Bernstein et al make the economic case for this in their paper “The costs and benefits of primary prevention of zoonotic pandemics”. They show that, even on pessimistic assumptions and without considering the potential impact of promising emerging technologies, significant investment in pandemic prevention is overwhelmingly justified. My submission focuses on a small number of key issues related to Terms of Reference 2 and 5 but my overall view is that pandemic prevention should be a key priority of the CDC and that our institutions and leaders should not simply concede that pandemics are inevitable. Indoor air quality could make a big difference The vast majority of Australians can access clean, safe, and pathogen-free drinking water. Further to Terms of Reference 2,1 want to see Australians have comparable access to clean, safe and pathogen-free air. This would be helpful for the ongoing COVID pandemic and for any future pandemic - while also providing co-benefits for individual health and the national economy. Cholera, a water-borne bacterial disease, caused more than 127,000 deaths in Great Britain in the mid-1800s. Radical improvements in sanitising drinking water as a public health measure have effectively ended waterborne disease in industrialised countries. The reduction of airborne diseases through clean indoor air is yet to receive the same systematic attention, despite the health and economic burden this class of disease places on Australia. Every winter, seasonal influenza-like illness (ILI) burdens the Australian healthcare system as Australians present with symptoms such as fever, cough, sore throat, and fatigue. In 2022, there were 9,440 reported COVID-19 and 308 influenza-associated deaths. It is my hope that improving indoor air quality (IAQ) can reduce the transmission of airborne pathogens, thus reducing the occurrence of ILI and its associated death toll. Reduced infection rates will also result in an increase in the productivity of Australia’s workforce through reducing the number of days that Australians take sick-leave to care for themselves and their loved ones. This will also reduce the burden on Australia’s healthcare system, specifically on GPs and hospitals who would otherwise have to treat patients with ILI. Despite the obvious benefits, I worry that clean indoor air suffers from a “tragedy of the commons” as it is a public good that requires widespread adoption to yield substantial benefits. Just like clean drinking water, coordinated action is required. As such, I believe this Inquiry is well placed to recommend that Australian governments do more to encourage and accelerate the improvement of indoor air quality. Higher-risk indoor environments - such as education facilities, aged care facilities, healthcare facilities and hospitals, food service, public assembly spaces, shopping centres, offices and places of worship - can be incentivised and supported to improve their indoor air quality through building standards, rebates, tax deductions, or other financial mechanisms. This would allow Australians to enjoy the benefits of these facilities and services with a significantly lower risk of exposing themselves to pathogens. Unlike disease-specific vaccinations, delivering safe air is pathogen agnostic and can reduce the speed at which future novel pathogens infect communities. Kleinwaks et al’s report “Air Safety t Combat Global Catastrophic Bicdsk” provides modelling for a scenario involving another pandemic of RO = 3, similar to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in a city of 2 million people. Without any behaviour changes or IAQ improvements, there would be 365,000 infections after 3 weeks. With indoor air quality interventions reducing respiratory disease infections by just 30% to an RO of 2.1, after 3 weeks there would only be 9,797 infections. This modelling shows that even modest reductions can flatten curves and buy time for medical countermeasures and healthcare systems. As such, IAQ interventions could shorten lockdowns, lower the likelihood of quarantine leaks and perhaps be able to contain and eliminate a novel pathogen before a pandemic begins. IAQ interventions also don’t require behaviour change - like mask wearing - which can be challenging to achieve. I think the inquiry should recommend that Australia pursue policies to make indoor air as free from pathogens as drinking water. With simple practices like ventilation, existing filtration technologies, and emerging pathogen inactivation technologies, like far-UVC, this goal is within reach. In a worse pandemic, next-generation PPE may be essential to keep critical infrastructure functioning In the context of Terms of Reference 5, support for industry, including in the context of labour shortages, I recommend that the Inquiry consider the paper by Gopal et al from the Geneva Centre for Security Policy titled “Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics”. The paper begins by unpacking ways that pandemic risk is increasing - in particular the possibility of engineered pandemics. The paper also makes a useful distinction between “stealth” and “wildfire” pandemics, which has deep implications for our policy response. Importantly, the paper goes on to explain that in a pandemic worse than COVID-19, workers who operate critical infrastructure may die or refuse to attend the workplace. If that happens, a modern interconnected society would rapidly collapse. The second-order consequences from a lack of electricity causing cascading failures in other critical sectors would far exceed the immediate consequences of the virus. When the Inquiry thinks about support for industry, the primary goal of that support should be keeping the lights on during a future, worse, pandemic. If critical infrastructure fails, other questions like financial support or community support rapidly become irrelevant or impossible. Among the various recommendations, Gopal et al argue that “pandemic-proof personal protective equipment” (P4E) is essential to dealing with the risk of failing critical infrastructure. The argument for P4E is that essential workers (such as those critical to providing food, water, power and law enforcement) need the confidence that they can continue to work without endangering themselves and their loved ones. The paper provides requirements for what this kind of equipment would need to look like. The paper also includes discussions about definitions of essential workers, ways of preparing the workforce and supply chain, and a discussion of social and technological approaches to slowing the spread of future pandemics. I recommend that the inquiry read Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics and treat it as a foundation for other recommendations. That is, our first priority has to be actions that take these worst-case scenarios off the table. Action against other elements of the terms of reference are only possible and impactful if we can be confident that we’re in a position to prevent a social collapse. Closing The notable public health challenges of history have been solved by innovative people bringing new ideas and perspectives to the challenge of health. As the scope of public health has grown, so has its ability to improve longevity and quality of life. The terms of reference of this inquiry are fundamentally about doing better in the future. Given how terrible future pandemics could be - the best thing the Inquiry could do for the future is to prioritise pandemic prevention, including the novel ways pandemics could occur in the future. While that will require uncomfortable thinking about unexpected topics and emerging technologies, these are the issues that could have the biggest impact towards securing a healthier future. Sean Lawrence PhD (Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering), BMechEng(Hons), BCom Go-Founder, High Impact Engineers References Australian Government, Department of Health and Aged Care, ‘National 2022 Influenza Season Summary’ (2022) Air Safety to Combat Global Catastrophic Biorisk, 1Day Sooner & Rethink Priorities Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics | Geneva Centre for Security Policy (October 2023) ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0072 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0073 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0073.pdf I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute my thoughts and personal experiences regarding the Australian Government's response to COVID-19. As a^^^^ndividual from Melbourne, the pandemic deeply impacted my I ^^^^^^^^■This experience highlighted the unique challenges faced by my demographic, both socially and economically, during such crises. My central point emphasises the critical need to focus on preventing future pandemics. From my perspective, addressing the risk of novel pathogens is something within our control. We should aim to prevent their emergence and swiftly tackle them if they arise. Considering the immense human and economic toll of pandemics, and acknowledging the possibility of facing even more severe outbreaks than COVID-19, prevention must be ourforemost objective. I strongly believe that the new Australian Centre for Disease Control should prioritise the prevention and control of emerging pathogens. The research paper by Bernstein et al., titled 'The costs and benefits of primary prevention of zoonotic pandemics," supports this stance economically.Theirfindings, even under conservative assumptions and without accounting for emerging technological advances, argue convincingly for substantial investment in pandemic prevention. My feedback is primarily aimed at 'preventive health measures', as outlined in the third term of reference. Source: "The costs and benefits of primary prevention of zoonotic pandemics" - PMC (nih.gov) Al-Bioconvergence In addressing pandemic prevention, Australia must urgently consider the increasing threat of engineered pandemics. The Inquiry's terms of reference, which focus on anticipating future pandemics, must include this critical aspect. The growing accessibility of technologies for designing and releasing novel pathogens is a significant concern, as highlighted by experts like MIT Professor Kevin EsveltThis issue is also detailed in the Geneva Security report "Delay, Detect, Defend: Preparing for a future in which thousands can release new pandemics." Professor Brian Schmidt AC from the Australian National University has expressed deep concern overthe "democratisation" of biotechnology, foreseeing a future where creating new diseases might become alarmingly simple.The expanding market for synthetic DNA and Al tools exacerbates this risk. Recognizing the gravity of this situation, President Biden issued an executive order in October 2023, mandating a framework for secure DNA screening. This includes screening for risky DNA sequences, implementing access controls, and enforcing robust oversight. Currently, about 20% of DNA orders are unscreened, posing a significant risk. Australia, having a permitting regime for synthetic DNA importation, should align with the US by updating this regime.This would require labs importing DNA into Australia to adopt these new screening measures for all orders. However, this approach alone isn’t sufficient. Continuous advancements in biotechnology and Al could allow users to circumvent these regulations. Thus, the Inquiry should recommend that the Department of Industry collaborate with the Department of Health and the CDC to establish safety standards for frontier models in Australia. This should focus on identifying and restricting Al models that pose biosafety risks. There should be clear expectations set for developers to ensure that Al with dual-use capabilities that pose catastrophic risks are controlled. It's also vital to monitor biotechnological advancements to prevent the widespread ability to engineer pathogens. Sources: • Biden, J. (2023) Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence. The White House. • Engineered Pathogens and Unnatural Biological Weapons: The Future Threat of Synthetic Biology - Combating Terrorism Centerat West Point • Andrew Leigh MP: Speeches and Conversations”;16 December 2021; at 18:41 • Home | International Gene Synthesis Consortium • The Common Mechanism - IBBIS • SecureDNA - fast, free, and accurate DNA synthesis screening • Understanding Al-FaciIitated Biological Weapon Development: https://www.longtermresilience.org/post/report-launch-examining-risks-at-the-inters ection-of-ai-and-bio Preventing novel sequences of concern via detection and screening Gopal et al's report from the Geneva Centre for Security Policy, titled “Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics,” sheds light on the criticality of early detection in managing pandemic threats, especially those engineered for national security disruption. The report describes two grave pandemic scenarios: "wildfire" and "stealth" pandemics. A "wildfire" pandemic is characterised by highly lethal and transmissible agents that could lead to societal collapse by disrupting essential services like food, water, power, and law enforcement. These pathogens must be virulent enough to incapacitate key workers, even during lockdowns. Theoretically, such pathogens, comparable to those in other species, could be engineered to affect humans. The report also outlines the concept of "stealth" pandemics. These involve pathogens that are initially mild or asymptomatic, with a prolonged incubation period, allowing widespread infection before their severe impacts are recognized. Current diagnostic protocols, which rarely sequence common colds, would likely miss such engineered pathogens. I liken a "wildfire" pandemic to a mix of measles and ebola traits, while a "stealth" pandemic combines elements of measles and HIV. In both cases, the rapid multiplication of cases highlights the value of time in pandemic response. The basic reproduction number (RO) is crucial in understanding pathogen spread. For instance, measles, with an RO of 12 to 18, demonstrates how quickly a highly infectious disease can escalate. Early detection of novel pathogens is vital to mitigate their impact. Catching a pathogen by the second generation of spread and responding by the third, instead of the fourth or fifth, could be crucial in managing bioterrorism and preventing societal breakdown. Thankfully, the COVID-19 pandemic has propelled advancements in early detection technologies. In Australia, we've improved testing infrastructure and surveillance approaches. The Inquiry should recommend building upon this progress to establish a robust public health monitoring and early detection system. This might include routine pathogen-agnostic testing of individuals with influenza-like symptoms who test negative for specific pathogens, and expanding wastewater screening through metagenomics. Publications like those from the Nucleic Acid Observatory, and papers by Australians such as Sharma et al's "Threat Net: A Metagenomic Surveillance Network for Biothreat Detection and Early Warning" and Liang et al's "Managing the Transition to Widespread Metagenomic Monitoring: Policy Considerations for Future Biosurveillance," offer insights into such systems. In facing both natural and engineered pandemic threats, rapid detection and response remain our most potent defence. As infectious disease landscapes evolve, prioritising and enhancing early detection is not only a health imperative but also a matter of national security. Citations: • Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics | Geneva Centre for Security Policy (October 2023) • Sharma S, Pannu J, Chorlton S, Swett JL, Ecker DJ. Threat Net: A Metagenomic Surveillance Network for Biothreat Detection and Early Warning. Health Secur. 2023 Sep-0ct;21(5):347-357. • Chelsea Liang, James Wagstaff, Noga Aharony, Virginia Schmit, and David Manheim. Managing the Transition to Widespread Metagenomic Monitoring: Policy Considerations for Future Biosurveillance. Health Security.Feb 2023.34-45. The terms of reference of this inquiry primarily care about being better prepared for the future. The evolution of public health has always been driven by forward-thinking individuals who bring fresh ideas and perspectives to tackle health challenges. Emphasising the importance of pandemic prevention is paramount, and this includes acknowledging and preparing for novel methods through which pandemics could arise. Tackling these challenges will necessitate delving into complex and sometimes uncomfortable topics, such as the implications of Al-bioconvergence and the critical need foradvanced detection and screening techniques for emerging pathogens. Addressing these cutting-edge issues is vital to ensure a healthier and more secure future. Prioritising these innovative approaches in pandemic prevention will be instrumental in safeguardingglobal health against the ever-evolving landscape of infectious diseases. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0073 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0074 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0074.pdf 1 Dec 2023 COVID-19 Response Inquiry Panel Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet Australian Government Dear Ms Kruk, Professor Bennett, and Dr Jackson Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission and share my views and experiences about the Commonwealth Government's response to COVID-19. My comments are primarily focused on Terms of Reference point 3: Preventative health measures. As a behaviour science researcher, I contributed to Australia's pandemic response by conducting a long- running survey of beliefs and behaviours among everyday Australians and how they coped with the impacts of COVID-19. This helped to provide evidence into public decision-making for the pandemic response. I am proud of the work I did in this survey, but I wish that it wasn't necessary. COVID-19 could have been prevented. Other pandemics can be prevented. My key message in this submission is the need to prioritise the prevention of future pandemics. Compared with other global catastrophic risks such as nuclear war, space weather, natural disasters such as supervolcanoes, and misused or misaligned artificial intelligence, it is within our power to prevent novel pathogens from emerging and to quickly identify, contain and eliminate them if they do. Given the human and economic costs of pandemics - and the fact that pandemics much worse than COVID-19 are possible - prevention should be our primary goal. The new Australian Centre for Disease Control should have as its top priority to prevent novel pathogens from emerging and controlling them if they do. Even on the most conservative assumptions, significant investment in pandemic prevention is overwhelmingly justified ("The costs and benefits of primary prevention of zoonotic pandemics", Bernstein et al, 2022). Australia should take the risk of engineered pandemics much more seriously. The terms of reference for the Inquiry focus on anticipating future pandemics - and the evidence shows that doing that effectively requires thinking about the possibility of humans designing, creating, and releasing dangerous and novel pathogens - and that this becomes easier every year, with advances in biotechnology and Al. (MIT Media Lab) has assessed that the technologies necessary to design, create and release dangerous and novel pathogens may become widely available by 2025. the market for synthetic DNA, speciality reagents, and Al y has continued to accelerate. With or without the additional risks of Al, synthetic DNA is likely the essential input that any malicious or negligent actor would need to engineer a pandemic. In October 2023, US President Biden made an executive order to improve screening of risky DNA sequences, best practices for access controls, technical guidances for effective screening, and robust oversight mechanisms. Australia regulates the importation of synthetic DNA, but could significantly improve its screening processes to be consistent with the US executive order. The Inquiry should recommend that the Commonwealth update its regulatory regime to be consistent with the US, by requiring labs importing DNA into Australia to apply these new screening procedures to all orders. Regulating synthetic DNA in this way will address one of the most pressing risks that Professors Esvelt and Schmidt highlight, but it's not an enduring solution. Steady advances in biotechnology and increasingly advanced Al are likely to be able to help people circumvent these regulations, especially as the pace of interlinked advances in Al and biotechnology continues to accelerate. For that reason, the Inquiry should recommend that DISR and DHAC work with the new CDC to develop minimum safety standards for "frontier Al models" that are deployed in Australia. These frontier Al models represent the state of the art, and include Large Language Models (LLMs) and Multimodal Foundation Models (MFMs) developed by companies like OpenAI and Google DeepMind. The intent of these standards on frontier Al models should be to ensure that models that pose biosafety risks are identified and restricted. Australia must clear expectations for companies that develop and deploy Al that frontier Al models with "dual-use" capabilities that could pose catastrophic risks are not welcome in Australia. Finally, we need to keep close tabs on advances in biotechnology to ensure the ability to engineer pathogens never becomes widely available. Despite the harm and suffering of COVID-19, there is an opportunity in this Inquiry to bring new ideas and perspectives to prevent and prepare for future pandemics. While that will require uncomfortable thinking about unexpected topics and emerging technologies, these are the issues that could have the biggest impact towards securing a healthier and safer future for Australians and all people of the world. Yours faithfully Alexander Saeri References • Esvelt, K. (2022). Delay, Detect, Defend: Preparing for a Future in which Thousands Can Release New Pandemics. Geneva Centre for Security Policy: Geneva paper 29/22 https://dam.gcsp.ch/files/doc/gcsp-geneva-paper-29-22 • Biden, J. (2023) Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence. The White House. • Engineered Pathogens and Unnatural Biological Weapons: The Future Threat of Synthetic Biology - Combating Terrorism Center at West Point ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0074 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0075 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0075.pdf Dear COVID-19 Inquiry Panel, Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission regarding Australia’s COVID-19 response. I have recently graduated from Medical school^^^^^^^^^^^ and will shortly commence working as a junior doctor. I became a doctor because I wanted to be there to support people in their most vulnerable times, and be able to improve the health of the Australian population. Throughout my degree, the world saw the dark consequences of a global pandemic, and this impacted my own education significantly, as well as the health and safety of many people I met through working in the COVID-19 Vaccination Clinics. I was excited to see Australia announce the creation of a Centre for Disease Control, and this seems like the next logical step in the wake of COVID-19. Throughout my course, our public health lecturers taught us the old proverb: “prevention is better than the cure”. This seems especially true in pandemics. Pike et al in “The Origin and Prevention of Pandemics” show that the “wait-and-respond approach is not sufficient and that the development of systems to prevent pandemics before they are established should be considered imperative to human health.” My submission is focused on a couple of key issues, but my overall view is that pandemic prevention should be a key priority of the CDC and that we should not simply concede that pandemics are inevitable. Nature can produce pathogens that are extremely infectious (eg measles: estimated RO of 15-20) Nature can also produce pathogens that are extremely fatal (eg rabies: almost 100% death rate) Nature, however, is not known to produce pathogens that have both high transmissibility and high mortality. Humans, driven by various motivations, could be on the verge of creating pathogens with both these features - risking pandemics much worse than COVID-19. Past events unfortunately indicate that humans have indeed resorted to biological weapons to harm others. The convergence of open science leading to the publication of dangerous knowledge, as well as the democratisation of synthetic biology, and Al-assisted research might mean that a small group of nefarious actors could cause catastrophic harm. The Unabomber, Theodore Kaczynski, and the Aum Shinrikyo cult both engaged in terrorism motivated by bringing the end of civilisation. If active in the year 2023, it is conceivable that COVID-19 would have inspired them to seek to engineer a pandemic pathogen. An Aum Shinrikyo member who had a virology PhD attempted to make the anthrax pathogen more lethal. Similarly, the Unabomber was a mathematics prodigy and professor, who could leverage emerging technologies to further his goals. Preventing the next pandemic requires making sure that highly skilled bad actors never have the capability to engineer a novel pathogen. However, a variety of trends are making this a realistic possibility. Open science norms - while typically essential to modern science - sometimes allow the publication of dangerous material. While the scientists who published the genomic sequences of the smallpox virus perhaps didn’t foresee a future where the synthesised DMA was readily available, that information cannot be “unpublished”. I recommend that the inquiry read “Information Hazards in Biotechnology” (2018) by Lewis et al fora deeper understanding of this risk and more examples, including Mousepox and Botulinum toxin H. Public commentary has focused on the possible origins of COVID-19, including whether it was a “lab leak”. Regardless of the specifics of COVID-19 specifically, I’ve been shocked to learn about the high rate of safety incidents at labs handling dangerous pathogens. A publication from Manheim and Lewis found that from 1975-2016 there were 71 reported high-risk human-caused pathogen exposure events - as well as evidence of underreporting.1 A lab leak also likely began the 1977 flu pandemic. Given pandemics can cost millions of lives, it seems clear that safety standards (or adherence to standards) fall far short of what is appropriate. While I’m firmly in favour of science, and think that science is a force for good in fighting pandemics, it has to be done responsibly. As an outsider, there is little transparency about how physical containment facilities in Australia are regulated. The Office of the Gene Technology Regulator seems to focus mostly on GMOs and provides little information about its functions regarding physical containment facilities. To the extent that information is available, OGTR’s 2022-23 annual report is proud that it certified a record 132 physical containment facilities last year, meaning that there are now 1,874 “high-level” facilities operating in Australia. It also reports that it only conducted 49 inspections in the same period, including no inspections of the highest-level PC4 facilities. Reviewing older reports, no PC4 facilities were inspected in 2021-22 either, and only 1 inspection occurred in 2020-21. Despite only conducting 49 inspections in 2022-23, 26 certified physical containment facilities were found to be non-compliant. In this context, the report noted that OGTR takes a “cooperative approach” to compliance and that no culpability was found in any of these cases. In addition to seeming shortcomings in oversight, the guidelines themselves are troubling. The rules for PC4 facilities were last updated in 2007 and reference standards like AS1324.1 on air filters and AS/NZS 2243.3 on lab safety, which don’t appear to have been updated since 2001 and 2002 respectively. AS1324.1 specifically has been criticised by the HVAC industry for being based on inaccurate research from the 1950s and has now been superseded by ISO 16890. 1 David Manheim and Gregory Lewis, ‘High-Risk Human-Caused Pathogen Exposure Events from 1975-2016’ (2022) 10 FWOOResearch 752. This is not necessarily a criticism of OGTR. OGTR only has 51 employees and has wide-ranging regulatory functions apart from these topics. Overall, this snapshot paints a grim picture of the state of regulation in Australia, and one that I think falls far short of public expectations about how seriously these issues would be taken. Before reading into this, I would have guessed that PC4 facilities comply with cutting-edge global standards that account for emerging technology, and would each be inspected several times per year. I think the Inquiry should also task the new CDC with responsibility for tracking the risk that a bad actor could create a pathogen with pandemic potential, and ensuring that safeguards remain one step ahead of that risk. I think that this Inquiry should recommend a thorough review of biosafety - including the suitability of requirements, degree of adherence, and adequacy of oversight - for all research that involves human or animal pathogens. The review should include a risk assessment that takes into account the potentially catastrophic global consequences of errors, and ensures that our approach to mitigation is proportionate to that risk. Since ancient times, the scope of public health has been increasing. Contemporaries would have thought that lenses in microscopes, the design of sewers, citrus on ships or a hundred other things had little to do with public health. However, expanding the scope of public health to include emerging issues and new technologies has directly led to substantially better outcomes. This inquiry is a chance to put new and emerging topics at the forefront of how we think about pandemics. Whether it's harnessing the benefits of metagenomic sequencing or addressing the risks of Al - I think it’s essential that this Inquiry look to the risks and opportunities of the future. Thank you for your consideration. Sarah Winthrope Citations: Revisiting Aum Shinrikyo: New Insights into the Most Extensive Non-State Biological Weapons Program to Date The Words of a Killer How the Unabomber’s writings helped lead investigators to his door 25 years ago Information Hazards in Biotechnology - Lewis - 2019 - Risk Analysis - Wiley Online Library OGTR Annual Report 2 22-23 Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care, Office of the Gene Technology Regulator Annual Report 2021-22 (ogtr.gov.au) Guidelines for the certification of physical containment facilities | Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (ogtr.gov.au) Bringing the Australian air filter standard up to speed - HVAC&R News (hvacrnews.com.au) ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0075 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0076 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0076.pdf Submission to COVID-19 Response Inquiry I am a| no prior health issues and since my first COVID infection Il have been disabled and unable to work, Even though I was aware about Long COVID prior to my first infection, I was under the impression that it was a continuation of cold symptoms, like a prolonged cough or some lingering fatigue. Instead I have struggled I am severely disappointed in the lack of public health messaging about Long COVID. Had I known about the potential long term effects I may have been able to reduce my exposure, or not pushed myself to go back to work during my recovery which set me back considerably. Having developed Long COVID I’ve since learned that it is not uncommon for people to develop chronic, debilitating health conditions as a result of a viral infection. These health conditions include ME/CFS, dysautonomia and many autoimmune conditions. It is imperative that to prepare for future pandemics, as well as support those still affected by COVID, that the Australian government invest in research to develop treatments for these infection associated chronic conditions. Some repurposed and over the counter treatments have alleviated my symptoms to a minor degree, but not enough to return my previous life. Improving ventilation and air filtration standards, especially in health care and public settings would also allow me to more safely navigate indoor areas, as a COVID re-infection has a high chance of further disabling someone disabled by Long COVID. This would also help to prepare Australia for a future pandemic, and reduce the incidence of general illness in the community. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0076 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0077 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0077.pdf SUBMISSION !. Or« mMMMM an email from emplQyerMMMBMMMMBMWMMMMMMMMHMMMMl i-'broadcast to employees stating: a. WA Government announced vaccination will be mandatory for the resource industry. b. From 12:01am on 1 December 2021, affected workers will need to have had at least their first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine to access their workplace. These workers will need to be fully Page 1 of 2 17. correspondence has been lodged with this submission as filename Correspondence.zip 18. I lodged with the Fairwork Commission FWC supporting documents have been lodged with this submission as filename 19. I lodged a with the Fairwork Commission (FWC) WC supporting documents have been lodged with this submission as filename 20. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Hterminated my employment. 21. I applied for abou^^Kobs and was I unable to secure employment due to my vaccine status. 22. On 10 June 2022, the WA Government dropped mandate requiring resource workers to be covid vaccinated. a. did not reach out to offer my previous job back to me. 23. 24. The actions of aused anxiety where I've reach out for support from the EAR (Employee Assistance Provider) Page 2 of 2 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0077 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0078 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0078.pdf My main issue is that the various costs associated with the anti-Covid measures, which were predictable, were not considered in the cost/benefit analysis of imposing the conditions Australians were virtually & even actually forced to endure. * Socially & psychologically. We are humans, not disease-prone organisms. I have been very involved in inviting people home for meals, etc, & have noticed a marked decrease in people’s desire to do it, post-pandemic. We are social creatures by nature but we are now significantly more isolated by habit alone, following an extended period of being forced/trained to do so. The psychological consequences are easy to anticipate, have already begun, will be ongoing & were always inevitable. * Educationally. It became clear early on that children & young adults would be virtually untouched by the disease yet they were still locked out of education, which has set them back to a significant degree from what their lives would otherwise have become. * Financially. * The resultant inflation, which any one could have predicted would result from huge govt spending for no productivity outcomes, was also not factored in. We are still paying the cost of that overreaction. Pandemics, wars, GFC’s & the like will always exact a cost, so there is no point working towards zero effect; early the law of diminishing returns kicked in, causing the cure to eventually become worse than the disease. * Many small businesses had to shut their doors through overzealous lockdowns, never to open again, & small business is the backbone of Australian productivity, which has suffered as a result. * Medically. * People’s right to choose their own disease treatment regime was utterly ignored, with suspensions & even sackings from work, demands for jabs for social & religious gatherings, doctors forbidden to explain the pros & cons of the jab, etc. * medical protocol for covid patients in at least Tennessee is now that they all receive Ivermectin, vitamins D & C & zinc, the very treatments that were forbidden during the pandemic. However, there is another issue: exempting Federal & State from the terms of the reference of the enquiry when they were the policy-setters of the very issue the enquiry is set to consider is utter nonsense. I presume it is set up to review policy so as to modify it as needed, but how will this be possible? ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0078 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0080 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0080.pdf Redfern n Legal Centre Independent Panel Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet PO Box 6500 Canberra ACT 2600 Australia Sent via online portal 5 December 2023 Dear Independent Panel Members COVID-19 Response Inquiry Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission to this important Inquiry. Our submission will focus on one aspect from the terms of reference: Mechanisms to better target future responses to the needs of populations (including across genders, age groups, socio-economic status, geographic location, people with disability, First Nations peoples and communities and people from culturally and linguistically diverse communities). Enclosed is a submission prepared by Redfern Legal Centre. We would be happy to provide any further information or comment that might be useful to your Inquiry. Yours faithfully, Camilla Pandolfini Chief Executive Officer Redfern Legal Centre Gadigal Land, 73 Pitt St Redfern NSW 2016 PO Box 1805, Strawberry Hills NSW 2012 Phone: (02) 9698 7277 Web: rlc.org.au Email: info(a)rlc.org.au ACN: 31001442 039 1. Introduction Redfern Legal Centre (RLC) is a non-profit community legal centre that provides access to justice. Established in 1977, RLC was the first community legal centre in NSW and the second in Australia. We provide free legal advice, legal services and education to people experiencing disadvantage in our local area and statewide. We work to create positive change through policy and law reform work to address inequalities that cause disadvantages. We provide effective and integrated free legal services that are client-focused, collaborative, non- discriminatory and responsive to changing community needs - to our local community as well as state­ wide. Our specialist legal services focus on tenancy, credit, debt and consumer law, financial abuse, employment law, international students, First Nations justice, and police accountability, and we provide outreach services including through our health justice partnership. During the COVID-19 lockdown, RLC was inundated with people contacting our service seeking legal advice about COVID fines and the public health orders. The demand for legal advice on our small legal centre was overwhelming and we struggled to provide timely information, advice, and assistance to people trying to understand the new and changing laws. Over the lockdown period, RLC assisted hundreds of clients submit fine reviews, seek fine write-offs and Work and Development Orders, and challenge fines in court. Our submission to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry has been informed by the significant volume of legal assistance RLC provided during the COVID-19 lockdown. 2. Key areas of concern Rapidly changing orders In New South Wales between 15 March 2020 and 31 January 2022, 266 principal and amending public health orders were issued, equating to a change in the law every 2.5 days on average over that period.1 Each public health order contained numerous directions which affected people in NSW in a vast number of ways. Through our casework, we found the rapid changes to the public health orders made it almost impossible for the public and police to maintain an understanding of the public health laws, resulting in many people being fined incorrectly, along with penalty notices issued that failed to meet the requirements under s.20 of the Fines Act 1996.2 Of significant note, for a considerable period of the lockdown, public health orders were only published in English, which left many in the community vulnerable both in terms of their health and their ability to comply with the law. Issuing of crippling fines The creation and implementation of on-the-stop fines for non-compliance with the rapidly changing public health directions was largely chaotic, unfair, and discriminatory. Historically, on-the-spot fines are for strict liability offences, where the elements of the offence are simple and unchanging, and the penalty amount is low. Yet when it came to COVID fines the reverse was true. The 1 NSW Ombudsman, The COVID Pandemic, Second Report, 2 September 2022. 2 Beame; Els v Commissioner of Police & Ors [2023] NSWSC 347. 2 elements of the offence were complex, what constituted "reasonable excuse" kept changing and was not exhaustive and the fine amounts were high ($1,000, $3,000, and $5,000). From March 2020 to September 2022, financial penalties of more than $56 million were imposed on NSW residents by NSW Police. COVID fines were notably higher than fines for existing criminal offences and people were effectively criminalised for behaviours that would never previously have brought them into contact with the police. Small towns with high First Nations populations and Western Sydney suburbs that are home to the most socioeconomically disadvantaged residents in the city bore the brunt of COVID fines. Statistics obtained by RLC under freedom of information laws from NSW police show that Walgett, Brewarrina, and Wilcannia had the most fines issued per capita during the pandemic.3 The Guardian newspaper conducted an analysis of the statistics obtained by RLC and found: • Areas with greater socioeconomic disadvantage had higher rates of fines per 1,000 people on average. • Most economically advantaged suburbs had a rate three times less than the most disadvantaged suburbs. • Only two suburbs in the state were hit with more than $lm in fines between July and October last year: Liverpool and Mount Druitt in Sydney's west. Residents in Blacktown were hit with almost $730,000 in fines. • The figures are much larger compared with many wealthier eastern and inner west suburbs, such as Bondi, which was hit with $83,900 in fines in the same period, or Rozelle, which was hit with just $43,200. • The suburbs are also home to a high percentage of people from low socioeconomic backgrounds, with the median weekly income in Blacktown $633 according to the last census4. The NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR) published statistics showing that each of the locations outside of Sydney that experienced high rates of COVID-19 enforcement action were places with a significant proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander residents.5 Similar statistics exist regarding the issuing of fines in Victora. In Victoria, a parliamentary inquiry found people in lower socioeconomic areas were twice as likely to be as those in higher socioeconomic areas.6 Children and the pandemic Data obtained by RLC through freedom of information laws show that between 1 July 2021 and 4 June 2022, nearly 4,000 COVID-19 fines totalling just over $2.1 million dollars were issued to children aged 13-17 years, the majority of which ranged from $1,000 up to $5,000 each.7 3 The Guardian, 10 Feb 2022, Mostafa Rachwani and Nick Evershed, 'Incredible imbalance': NSW Covid fines during Delta higher in disadvantaged suburbs': 4 Ibid. 5 NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR), 'NSW Recorded Crime Statistics 17 Mar 2020 to 31 Dec 2021: Number of persons of interest (POIs) proceeded against by the NSW Police for a COVID-19 related breach of the Public Health Act 2010' (2022) 6 Sentas, Vicki, Webber, Leanne, Boon-Kuo, Louise, 30 July 2021,'Opinion: COVID has changed policing-but now policing needs to change to respond better to COVID', UNSW Newsroom: . 7 Redfern Legal Centre, GIPA, NSW police, COVID fines by age and law code. 3 RLC is particularly concerned that the current fine system in New South Wales treats children and adults the same, an issue which the COVID fines regime brought into sharp focus. Generally speaking, children do not have the capacity to pay fines issued to them. Many children study full-time and if they are employed, their employment is usually casual, for a low number of hours and on a low wage. Children are unlikely to be aware of the fine review system or how to obtain advice about their fine. We believe the NSW fines system should be tailored to the financial and social standing of children and young people in our society. We consider it is in the public interest to reduce the number of children having contact with the fines system. Dr Noam Peleg, senior lecturer at the University of New South Wales's Faculty of Law & Justice, considers that the NSW government may be in breach of Australia's obligations under international law as a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of a Child by requiring children as young as 10 to work off COVID fines. Dr Peleg refers to Article 32 of the UN Convention on the Rights of a Child, which states: "governments should protect children from work that is dangerous or that might harm their health or education." Dr Peleg is also of the view that the issuing of COVID fines to children is "a violation of the Convention on the Rights of a Child" and "working orders directed at children are a second, consequential, violation."8 The disproportionate distribution of fines to First Nations communities, and communities with high proportions of ethnic minorities, could be a "clear violation of the core guiding principles of the duty to take a child's best interests into account, and not to discriminate between children."9 3. Addressing issues of concern We recommend that in the event of another pandemic or similar crisis, taking into account the needs of children, First Nations people and those from lower socio-economic backgrounds: I. Fines should not be used as the primary tool of enforcement as they tend to be applied disproportionately against First Nations and socioeconomically disadvantaged people. If fine offences are created, the amounts of the fines should be limited to a reasonable amount, police should issue cautions for less serious breaches and children should not be fined. II. Relevant laws should balance the need to respond to changing health or other requirements with the need for simplicity and consistency over time, so that people have a reasonable opportunity to understand them. III. The government should provide clear and accessible information about any new laws, including in a range of community languages, and invest in community engagement with diverse groups to promote compliance. IV. For future pandemic planning the government should explore a cooperative, educative health approach rather than a punitive, criminalising approach to addressing a health crisis. 8 Zwartz, Henry,04 August 2022, 'NSW COVID fines on kids could breach international law', University of New South Wales. 9 Ibid at 7. 4 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0080 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0081 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0081.pdf Introduction I am a retired 78 year old lay person. As a citizen I am pleased to have this opportunity to make this submission to the Commonwealth's inquiry into its response to the COVID 19 Pandemic. My family and I have been typically impacted by the Commonwealth's response, and no special or unique features are provided. Rather, these comments should have broad or general application to most Australians. This submission primarily addresses the "Governance" term of reference. Key Points The key points are: I hated the physical, social and psychological impost of any lock down. I highly value our freedom of travel, association and amenity. Government needs to properly safeguard these basic freedoms as they are precious. Ineffective lock downs in the unproven name of health safety were a gross over reach and this needs to be captured. Let us not just knee-jerk on the side of safety, with no appreciation or accountability for society's full costs of those actions. I did however also hate the prospect of my death in a pandemic! Judgement and balance are called for. With the benefit of hindsight, I would choose a "zero constraint" i.e. "let it rip" strategy, rather than ostensibly the extreme risk aversion response that was adopted. But I am pleased I didn't die of COVID! Issues and Solutions Federation of the Commonwealth Of course the perennial issue for epidemics and Health in Australia is that we are a Federation. There is accordingly the problem of the Commonwealth and the States (Territories deliberately excluded here) with their respective incompatible Constitutions and Sovereignties, all-be-them with the same King of England. The issue of State borders and the policy or health directives of the Commonwealth imposing certain spatial constraints or local lock downs had different effects. Individual State and Territories' unilateral responses are a fundamental structural reality in the management of all national crises. It certainly isn't going to go away before the next pandemic, if ever! This inquiry needs to explicitly address this Issue. Ministerial Responsibilities That the PM of the day felt the need for the GG to secretly swear him into multiple Ministries and that the GG agreed was surprising, because it is unusual! This in particular should be an explicit focus of this Inquiry. It goes to the essence of Governance. There may in fact be a good reason for that secrecy to have been adopted, but the public and the Ministers concerned were not apprised of this. It could portend a significant short coming in the established arrangements, however given that Australia did manage several world wars and other emergencies effectively under the existing arrangements; it seems unlikely that even a pandemic like COVID 19 would warrant such extraordinary exceptions. It will be particularly interesting to learn what the Inquiry makes of the secret emergency powers bestowed on the PM by the GG. Similarly the secrecy of the GG in this too is of some public interest. Ideally any exercise of such powers by the GG should be immediately publically gazetted for all to see. Even if Australia was to become a republic and vest all Commonwealth sovereignty in the Australian Head of State (HoS) and abolish the GG and British Sovereignty, the States still retain their independent Sovereignty through their respective State Governors, directly from the King National Cabinet National Cabinet is an interesting concept. It has the lofty goal of finding national solutions, but the political reality is there are separate sovereignties of the Commonwealth and each of the States. They have different jurisdictions, different constituencies, and different political parties. There is no common authoritative instrument constituting National Cabinet. Notwithstanding some particular national crisis, some political situation will make it expedient for dissent by one or more members of national cabinet, from an otherwise national consensus. This is the reality of Australian Politics. It might even be a good thing? National Cabinet is ostensibly a good idea. It comprises the PM and his sovereign powers conferred by the Constitution and exercised through the GG. The six State Premiers and their sovereign powers are exercised through their respective independent State Governors. National Cabinet of course also includes the First Ministers of the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) and the Northern Territory (NT), but the two Territories have no sovereign powers, other than those bestowed indirectly through the Commonwealth and the GG. Accordingly, the National Cabinet has no singular statutory or sovereign power; its authority is vested solely in the good will of its members. National Cabinet can do anything that it collectively agrees to do. However, no member is obliged to agree or be bound by anything that National Cabinet proposes. It consequentially can only produce a lowest common denominator result. National Cabinet is therefore useful only where there is consensus, but it does provide a visible vehicle through which to inform the nation of such agreements. A National Cabinet is nice to have; if we didn't have one, then the pandemic would have certainly created one anyway. There was of course COAG which is taken here as the predecessor of National Cabinet, which also functioned beyond just epidemics. Although it has no real teeth, National Cabinet is probably still useful. This inquiry should consider how National Cabinet might be authoritatively improved, particularly for future national Health responses. There is nothing to bind any member of National Cabinet should they not agree with any particular proposal. To the extent that both sides of the political spectrum can simultaneously be in National Cabinet, makes it a unique and convenient forum. However, the independent and separate sovereignty of each member is always just below the surface. Establishing authoritative power for National Cabinet is a non-trivial problem. The options probably comprehend: Revolution; through National Cabinet; on to Do Nothing. The latter option is probably the comfortable default position for any complex issue presented to National Cabinet! Any proper solution is way beyond scope here. Referendum? On-shore mRNA Capability Australia's development of virus sera and immunology has to be commended. Especially the establishment of on-shore production of mRNA vaccines and associated technology is a very good thing. Short of market forces, it may not otherwise have happened without the impetus or aspiration of a national response to the COVID 19 epidemic. These benefits ought be highlighted and rightfully celebrated by all Australians. National COVID Phone App. One unfortunate governance artefact was the need for us all to load the National COVID 19 Application onto our mobile phones. It proved to be a gigantic flop. These sorts of ideas need to be better conceived and more rigorously developed before significant resources are consumed by them. The benefits realised by that particular fiasco appear to be zero! The approval authority, for the public money squandered on this project, should be identified and they should be professionally disciplined. The relevant subordinate system engineer (if there was one!) should similarly be dealt with and sent on appropriate systems engineering or requirements development update and retraining. Ministerial accountability and executive responsibility are never the fault of the enthusiastic technologists, no matter how good they may otherwise be. Ministers and Senior Executives can properly delegate authority, but they can never delegate their personal responsibility. Commonwealth Leadership The TOR here, explicitly exclude the Inquiry from addressing unilateral action by individual Premiers, however, there are some national response issues arising from those actions for which the Commonwealth should account. One particularly unfortunate case was where my wife's sister died in a regional OLD hospital during the pandemic. We obtained medical certification, by a Doctor at the Hospital, that she was terminally ill (not from COVID) and only had days to live. We presented this letter to the OLD border control authorities seeking compassionate exemption to travel directly and exclusively to see her. The request was denied and we were unable to visit her before she died. The point here is that the national epidemic response plan should take a risk management approach for individual compassionate exemptions, especially where valid documentation is provided. Perhaps National Cabinet could establish such compassionate exemption protocols? ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0081 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0082 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0082.pdf The mandate had deprived me of making a living. It has caused me to have^^^^^^^nd The mandat^Tac^lestroyechm^oul and spirit. I believe I am not the only one that the mandate ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0082 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0083 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0083.pdf To whom it may concern, I would like to explain to you my background with my previous employer and the events leading up to my dismissal from the Company due to not having the Covid vaccination. I was living on the^^^^^^^^Mand working as a Childcare Director for a company there for 8 years when I applied for a Director's position with Lady Gowrie Blackall in July 2021. Following my interview via zoom, I was immediately offered the position. Blackall is a city in the outback with 1500 people and finding quality staff is always a hard task, so they were rather elated to be able to recruit someone of my calibre, highly qualified and experienced. My husband and I moved our whole life to Blackall, and I started my job on 18th August 2021, and everything was well and good up until the mandates were announced. My company requested a covid vaccination certificate or we would not be able to work. I had serious concerns about the vaccine since my sister in Brazil had a major reaction to her first dose, being bedridden for 3 days and with serious issues to her heart. My mother had a heart condition, and I was concerned for my own health. I clearly expressed that to my employer however they dismissed my concerns and said it was a government mandate and I had to take it up with the government. I requested a risk assessment, outlining why I would be more of a risk than my vaccinated colleagues, who could also catch and spread the virus. Again, I was told they didn't need to do one as it was a government directive, but as far as I know, the contract I signed is only between my employer and I and a 3rd party cannot interfere. Furthermore, in my line of work, we carry out risk assessments for everything, so to say a risk assessment for a deadly virus is not required seems completely illogical and absurd. What I noticed since I was stood down on the 17th December 2021 is that the attitude towards me had changed. On a zoom call in January with the CEO and HR manager, I sensed some hostility and disapproval from the CEO. Whilst she had always been pleasant and friendly before, she was cold and rigid on this call and subsequent ones. I was invited to a show cause meeting to explain why I didn't think I should be terminated on the 12th February 2022. On this meeting, I expressed that I did not wish to be terminated, that I'd been working in Childcare for 20 years and could count on one hand how many times I had sick leave, that I had serious concerns about the vaccination given my mum had a heart condition, my sister had a serious reaction to the vaccine and that I had read that one of the adverse reactions is myocarditis and pericarditis, heart conditions. I inquired about their rush to terminate me and explained that mandates are temporary and would be lifted and given how hard it is to have good staff in the outback that they kept me stood down without pay and once mandates were lifted (which happened 6 months after), then have me back. The next day, I received an email saying that they listened to my concerns and given I expressed I did not wish to be terminated, I should sign an attached document which was which I would resign from my position and not talk about what nappenec^raecHnecHo sign the document and on the 14th I received my termination letter. The pain and suffering this whole process has caused me is something I cannot come to terms with. The day I was stood down felt like I had lost a dear member of my family. That's the only way I can describe it. I am still grieving it. My job was my happy place, my passion, my everything and I dedicated 20 years of my life to give back to the children, treat them like my own, love, care for and protect them. I treated all my workplaces as my own, gave my very best, did a lot of unpaid hours to ensure they were the best they can be. Being told I could no longer enter the workplace was like being stabbed in the heart. It did a lot of damage to my emotional well-being. I thought I was a very strong person, but this really hit me so hard and so painfully. On a financial level, once I was dismissed, we were forced to sell our house on the Sunshine Coast as we were not sure whether we were going to be able to continue paying the mortgage, so I was hit not only emotionally but also financially. I would like to thank you for your time reading my story and allowing me to express why I believe I was discriminated against and how this has impacted me. Although I have been negatively affected by this whole process, I am on the road to healing and hope to be able to return to work with children one day as I never saw myself doing anything else. I never imagined that would be taken away from me and it has been extremely hard typing this account and having to relive it once again. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0083 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0084 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0084.pdf 1 World’s-Best Statistical Practice Saves Lives 2 Dennis Trewin AO, FASSA is the former Australian Statistician and former President of the 3 International Statistical Institute and the International Association of Survey Statisticians. 4 Nicholas Fisher is Principal of ValueMetrics Australia and Visiting Professor of Statistics at the 5 University of Sydney. He was formerly a Chief Research Scientist in CSIRO. 6 Noel Cressie FRSN FAA is Distinguished Professor at the University of Wollongong, Australia, and 7 a centre director in its National Institute for Applied Statistics Research Australia (NIASRA) 8 Executive Summary 9 As three senior members of the Statistics profession, we are concerned that statistical methods 10 are not being used, or not being used appropriately, in formulating responses to the continuing 11 challenges facing Australia, including pandemics. 12 Whilst our focus is largely on the future, we shall highlight some key aspects of the response to 13 the COVID-19 pandemic (hereafter COVID) as context for the importance of addressing the 14 issues we identify. Elaboration of each of these aspects is available in Attachment 1, Details 15 Relating to the Submission. 16 We are scientists who believe that collaboration from all relevant disciplines is critical when the 17 next pandemic comes. From a statistical perspective, we think there are five critical issues to 18 managing a pandemic. These are given below, followed by actionable recommendations 19 stemming from them. 20 1. There is need for national, expert oversight of all scientific aspects, among them 21 epidemiological and statistical. However, during COVID, statistical aspects (apart from the 22 ABS surveys) were largely ignored. 23 2. The timely capture and analysis of diverse informative data streams is critical to informing 24 wise decision-making and ongoing communication with the community about the current 25 state of a pandemic. There needs to be a pandemic information plan that can be activated at 26 short notice. The plan should include a rolling national, scientifically designed monitoring U survey. [An outline for such a plan is provided on page 3 of Attachment 2, Pandemic 28 Information Management Plan. An earlier version was submitted to the Office of the Prime 29 Minister and Cabinet in August 2020, who referred it to the Department of Health, but there 30 is no evidence it was considered.] 31 3. There is a need to understand the potential impacts of uncertainty in the assumptions and 32 models used for predictions. Had this been adopted appropriately during COVID, the timing 33 for reducing the public-health impacts would have changed and the impacts of the Omicron 34 variant (including fatalities) significantly reduced. [See Attachment 1, Details Relating to the 35 Submission.] 36 4. Australia needs to follow best international practice in developing, updating, and using 37 epidemiological models that include an accounting of uncertainty and ongoing synthesis of 38 competitive predictions. For example, our national weather forecasting at BOM applies this 39 world's-best-practice approach. However, during the COVID pandemic, the government 40 relied almost exclusively on the modelling from the Doherty Institute, so dramatically 41 underutilizing the available national expertise. 42 5. It is essential to allow for socio-economic heterogeneity: policy and practice may need to 43 vary from sub-population to sub-population. In fact, ignoring heterogeneity led to biases in 44 predictions (including an upward bias in estimates of the effectiveness of the vaccination 45 program). 46 RECOMMENDATION 1. Professional statisticians should be appointed to the various advisory 47 groups to government that involve working with data, to advise on world's-best statistical 48 practice. 49 RECOMMENDATION 2. There should be a professional statistician on the Advisory Group of 50 ATAGI. 51 RECOMMENDATION 3. A Pandemic Information Plan should be developed as a matter of 52 urgency. Furthermore, we strongly recommend that a multi-disciplinary Task Force be 53 established now, to determine the data/information requirements for managing a pandemic 54 and how they might be met. The membership should include a senior statistician with statistical 55 modelling and analysis expertise, an official (government) statistician, an epidemiologist, a 56 medical researcher, an economist, a social psychologist, and a public-health official. 57 RECOMMENDATION 4. A rolling national, scientifically designed monitoring survey should be 58 instituted at the first sign of an emerging pandemic, preferably with the involvement of the ABS. 59 RECOMMENDATION 5: Because of the ubiquitous need throughout government for high-level 60 data-scientific oversight of actual or potential decision-making based on complex data, and the 61 need for an independent source of advice, we recommend the position of Chief Data Scientist 62 be established with strong parallels to that of Chief Scientist. Such an appointment would have 63 enhanced policy development in many other areas. [See Attachment 3, Proposal for a Chief 64 Data Scientist.] 65 RECOMMENDATION 6. We urge that transparency of data sources and modelling be 66 implemented in Australia, consistent with the approaches being used in the USA 67 (https://covidl9forecasthub.org ), in collaboration with the CDC; and those used in Europe 68 (https://covidl9forecasthub.eu), coordinated by the European Centre for Disease Prevention 69 and Control. 70 RECOMMENDATION 7. As part of the development of the Pandemic Information Plan 71 (Recommendation 3 above), identify the most important sources of heterogeneity that will 72 impact the pandemic, and include them as part of the relevant data streams. 73 Finally, we draw attention to the following international commentary on these matters. 74 75 76 77 Copyright considerations prevent us reproducing the entire contents that justify the title. 78 However, the final paragraph is very compelling: 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0084 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0085 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0085.pdf Submission to Australian Covid Inquiry Dear Inquiry Panel, After an earlier career in agriculture in South Australia and cattle production in Solomon Islands, I studied, inter alia, public health, including epidemiology and nutrition, and completed a PhD in selenium in plants and humans. I have extensive experience of R&D in micronutrients in food systems in numerous countries. My work on agronomic biofortification of food crops with selenium, iodine and zinc, along with studies of orange sweet potato (for pro-vitamin A provision) contributed to the Washington DC, Professorwinning the 2016 World Food Prize, the de facto Nobel Prize for Food & Agriculture. In recent years I have examined closely Germ Theory and in particular the discipline of Virology (an erudite reference for this is I will be brief. There is a wealth of evidence now (including some summaries provided in the attached file "GMO DNA data") to support my assertion that there was no pandemic at all. The whole thing was a global psy-op/hoax, designed to advance world government by those who currently control global finance, etc. It was obvious from the start of its roll-out (ca February 2020) that this had been planned for years. Thei^wa^oomlinatioMoetween supranational bodies such as the funded by al; most of the world's governments, the mainstream media and large corporations. The supposed SARS CoV-2 virus has never been isolated, let alone shown to be causal for even one death. The so-called Covid PCR test does not test for viruses, as repeatedly stated by its inventor, Dr who won a Nobel Prize for this. It is a laboratory method to amplify fragments of DNA and RNA. See attachment, a press release on the occasion of my second court appearance in late 2021 for refusing to undertake this fraudulent test. The charge against me was dropped. Had the case proceeded, I would have easily exposed the "test" as a fraud in court. It is used to this day as the foundation of the Covid scam. There is NO novel, dangerous coronavirus, but there IS a dangerous bioweapon, in the form of the "Covid vaccines", which some researchers estimate have killed over 45 million people globally to date, along with many more serious injuries (see attached document). Astonishingly, many corporations and government Health Departments (including SA Health) still mandate it for employees! There are now countless lawsuits in progress globally against the "vaccine" manufacturers and purveyors. The bulk of the populace went along with this massive deception, trusting the government and the medical profession, which clearly had been captured by Big Pharmaceutical (which I refer to as "Harma"). The only way to prevent another episode of medical tyranny like this is to break free from the baleful influence of Harma. The brilliant^^^^^l in stated that if Big Pharma continued on its then-trajectory, it would succeed in destroying humanity. He would not be at all surprised by what has unfolded over the previous four years. "The Covid Coup" must never happen again. Clearly, Australia needs to sever its membership of the WHO. If that outfit gets its way, there goes any semblance of health sovereignty for Australia...the WHO would be able to announce a "pandemic" whenever it wishes, with consequent imposition of medical fascist tyranny...no thanks!!! Thank you for your consideration, Yours sincerely, Graham Lyons B Agric Sci M Public Health PhD ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0085 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0086 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0086.pdf Monday, 6 November 2023 Alexandra Paine Submission to the Covid-19 response inquiry. Introduction (please note all links are coloured blue for accessibility) My name is Alex, I’m a 24 year old living in live with multiple Disabilities; | Hind more. In December of 2020 I was diagnosed with | the treatment,that I am on to stop the progression of the disease makes me severely immunocompromised by the ATAGI’s standards (See table 2a, CD-20 Antibodies). Because of this I am at high risk for serious illness due to Covid 19. I am also on which means that any and all mitigations that I use to lower my risk of contractincK >vid 19 need to be cheap or government funded. I have had 5 vaccine doses, and one course c I still wear an N95 everywhere I go. I will be exploring my personal experiences with regard to the terms of reference of; -Key health response measures -Broader health supports -Mechanisms to better target future (and I would argue CURRENT) responses to the needs of particular populations With this in mind, I share my experiences as a po r and Disabled person during the ingoing pandemic; My first issue is access to healthcare, due to the complete lack of proper safety mitigations for at risk and immunocompromised people I have not beer^an^tij^annot access healthcare safely; to outline this I share a recent experience I had when attending at it Jon the 27th of October 2023. I entered the hospital and got into the elevator to head up to then ^^^■(or medihotel as it’s more commonly known), after I entered the elevator I was followed by 3 staff members, two completely unmasked and one in a surgical mask being worn incorrectly. The two unmasked members started asking the third why he was masking, “have you got it” “no” he answered, “just my wife and kids”. So he’s an extremely close contact of 2 cases, could be carrying an asymptatic infection, coming to work in a hospital full of vulnerable patients and can’t even wear a surgical mask correctly. Once on the correct floor, I head down the hallway to the reception area for the medihotel. Only to be greeted with a big sign on the door saying “surgical masks required, Staff may elect to wear an N95” once I made it through check in and into the actual infusion centre, the nurse taking care of me was wearing her surgical mask inside out. With the white part facing out. She then asked me if I had taken my rapid test (a negative test is required for entry, and they send text reminders beforehand) I replied yes, it was negative. She then said she dn’t need to see it and she “trusted me”. She then repeated that for every person in the four person ^H room. So nobody was properly checked to have a negative RAT. I was the first person there, but throughout the day people arrived, and t ok off their masks after they were sitting down. No members of staff made any effort tc ask patients to keep their masks on. I was then stuck, as a severely immunocompromised person, in a room with a group of unmasked people, getting m ^^H^hat makes me severely Immunocompromised, for over five hours. All of this means that I was unable to safely access critical healthcare that is vital to my wellbeing as a disabled person. For the following week, and for the entire day, I was constantly afraid that I would catch Covid and become seriously ill or hospitalised. My second issue is lack of access to proper mitigations, firstly due to lack of affordability since the axing of government funded programs, but also due to the fumbling of designing said programs properly. As a person who catches public transport and can’t drive due to my Disabilities, once the state funded free RAT tests through pharmacies was ended, I was not able to access free RATs through the library and community centres program as there were no accessible options for me that were feasible for me to get to on public transport, with most over an hour of travel away. Being classed as severely immunocompromised, I was one of the people who was classified as eligible to access but due to multiple factors I was only able to receive one dose before the government stopped funding it through the PBS scheme at the end of 2022. One of the main reasons I was unable to access doses prior to that date was lack of proper education and awareness for medical practitioners about measures t( take to protect their immunocompromised patients. I presented the TGA website to my neurologist showing my eligibility and asked him to prescribe it, he was happy to do so but asked to see the rest of the website so that he could learn which of his other patients would be eligible. If there were better 1 recourses and awareness for medical practitioners, more patients could easily and efficiently access recourses that can help to prevent serious illness or death due to Covid 19. Inability to access proper precautions that I am entitled to has been an ongoing theme throughout the pandemic. This year on the Sth of February 2023, ATAGI released recommendations for a booster dose after 6 months for all vulnerable and at risk groups. I was part of that group, but I was not made aware of the updated booster availability until the 22nd of September 2023, after the SECOND round of Smonthly be st er advice was released which I only found out from Twitter. Because of the fact that booster advice was not shared widely through the medical system or mainstream media, I was not made aware of this. In fact I had actually asked my GP about this and she was not aware there was any indications that another booster dose was available. If I had fair access to this information easily and reliably I could have had another be ster by now and almost be eligible for my second of the year in December 2023. Instead I have not had a single dose since December 2022. As a severely immuncompromised person this simply is not good enough. It is also completely unacceptable that this kind of important and life saving information is only available to those of us who are media literate and can find this information online. Doctors need to be fully aware of this information so that they can be the ones to advise their at risk patients who are not as media literate, especially when one of the main groups of people advised to have a booster are those aged over 65 & Disabled at risk people. We should not bare the burden of having to source this information ourselves, This is not acceptable. I am not medically allowed to get vaccinated within 30 days pre or post my 3° । was only able to get my first dose of 2023 on the 1 st of December. The last month of the year. Another point I would like to raise is the ridiculous system to access antiviral treatment, he RS weosite clearly outlines that in order to even receive PBS prices, you must test positive and get your script within 5 days, otherwise you pay full price. The full price of Paxlovid is 1,159$ someone on Disability pension like me could simply not afford that. In order to do this, you need to realise you are sick, try a RAT, if that doesn’t provide you with a positive you have to organise an appointment with your GP to get a referral for a PGR test. Neither RAT'S or PCR tests are 9%. reliable. I personally tested negative on a PGR only to test positive a few days later in 2022. Even if you manage to test positive, you really need to test positive on days 1 or 2, in order to see your GP for an antiviral script, within the first 5 days? I don’t know a single person, including myself, who can get a GP appointment within 3-5 days. Then you still have to arrange to somehow get the script and have it sent to you? For someone like me who lives alone and has no family nearby, absolutely none of this is accessible to me. Even if I could arrange a refferal to a PCR, I can’t access one. And I couldn’t during 2020,21,22 either. There was absolutely nowhere near enough walk in centres and getting the at home service to come and test you was a nightmare and they definitely didn’t have enough staff to see people within a 5 day window. At home testing is now no longer even available, so someone in my position who does not drive r have anyone who can drive them to a pathology centre, cannot even properly access a PCR test. This forces people to be heavily reliant on RATS, which are much harder to test positive on in the first 5 day window. In order to give people with Disabilities and immunocompromised people access to safe and adequate care when it comes to Covid 19, there needs to be better organisation and awareness of Covid 19 information and materials. Hospitals and medical practices need to be better equipped with the correct information and tools to provide adequate care for at risk groups. The current (and previous) system for care means that people who are at risk to Covid are currently being forced to carry the entire responsibility of their care and mitigations completely on their own, and given the lack of access to the proper and correct and consistent information this means that vulnerable groups are currently not being afforded the correct tools to keep themselves safe or get the correct care if they catch Covid 19. And given the complete lack of public messaging about correct and useful mitigations to take to protect oneself from Covid, this means that at risk people are currently at a very high chance of catching Covid. I still see elderly people at the supermarket dousing themselves with hand sanitiser, but they are not wearing a mask because they are not being given fair access to the correct information (hand sanitiser will not save them from airborne virus particles.) Staff of high risk essential environments should be required to wear N95s, ESPECIALLY when in spaces with high risk patients (eg Oncology wards.) Employers should be required to give staff proper information and education on what steps they need to be taking to keep patients safe. Specialists and Doctors should have access to a portal for the clearest and best information about what to do to protect their patients, what patients are eligible for booster vaccines, antivirals and protective treatments like Evusheld so that they can properly care for their at risk patients. Patients should have access to a clear and concise website to determine their own eligibility for such things and what steps they should be taking to protect themselves if they so wish. You cannot have a personal responsibility strategy if you are not giving people the tools to even take that responsibility in the first place. But at the absolute bare minimum disabled and at risk people deserve to be able to safely and effectively receive their medical care without having to fight for the most basic safety precautions. 2 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0086 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0087 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0087.pdf THE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry Submission Brain and Mind Centre University of Sydney December 2023 Introduction Thank you for the opportunity to make this submission to the Inquiry. The challenges posed by COVID-19 were extraordinary and remain threatening. There is much to be commended about the way Australia responded to these challenges, but also some key lessons which could better prepare us for future threats. Dynamic modelling represents vital new expertise in helping us to understand and organise to respond to fluid situations, such as that posed by COVID-19. About the Brain and Mind Centre The University of Sydney's ai ai j IVI d Centre is a network of researchers and clinicians who partner across borders and disciplines in pursuit of a common goal: to develop better treatments for conditions of the brain and mind and improve health outcomes now and for future generations. Our multidisciplinary research teams are at the forefront of brain and mind sciences. We seek answers to some of the world's greatest health challenges, including: • Childhood development and behaviour, such as autism and behavioural disorders • Youth mental health and addiction, including youth, addiction, gambling and mental health policy Under our economics and systems science stream, we also provide research and ideas on how best to design a contemporary mental health system, fit for purpose in the 21st century. We are developing next generation clinical and systems-based decision support tools, utilising participatory systems modelling approaches. We harness data science methods and innovation from across disciplines in order to achieve advances in the mental health and mental wealth of young people. COVID-19 Related Research Dynamic Systems Modelling We have presented information to the Australian public regarding the capacity of dynamic systems models to maki th rr st invesi nents in mental health. Our paper in Nature outlined the major challenges and priorities to ensure that models are used to reliably guide policy and allocate resources. At the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, systems models were rapidly deployed in many countries to estimate the likely trajectories of transmission, mortality, and health system burden, to determine the most impactful mitigation strategies, and to most effectively allocate limited resources. We modelled multiple COVID-19 trajectories and showed that the optimal mental health strategies were consistent across these scenarios. The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated the significant value of systems modelling in supporting proactive and effective public health decision making despite the complexities and uncertainties that characterise the evolving crisis. The same approach is possible in the field of mental health. However, a commonly levelled (but misguided) criticism prevents systems modelling from being more routinely adopted, namely, that the presence of uncertainty around key model input parameters renders a model useless. 2 This recent study explored whether radically different simulated trajectories of suicide would result in different advice to decision makers regarding the optimal strategy to mitigate the impacts of the pandemic on mental health. This study demonstrates that robust decision making can occur even in the presence of significant uncertainty about the social and economic impacts of covid-19 on mental health. Another recent paper, currently under review, compares simulation results for a set of progressively more refined models with data on psychological distress, suicide, intentional self-harm hospitalisations, and mental health-related ED presentations published after our initial projections were released in July 2020. We show that our apparent overestimation of the mental health impacts of COVID-19 was due primarily to our assumption that new cases of moderate to very high psychological distress emerging as a result of the pandemic could be considered equivalent to pre­ pandemic cases (with the same per capita rates of spontaneous recovery and suicidal behaviour). The results suggest that accommodating the influence of prior mental health on the psychological effects of population-wide social and economic disruption is likely to be essential for accurately forecasting the mental health impacts of future public health crises as they arise. Suicide Modelling With considerable recent resources allocated to suicide prevention and universal aftercare, we have used systems modelling and simulation to consider population-level decision making for best strategic allocation of limited resources. We have shown that impactful youth suicide prevention requires a combination of social connectedness programs, technology-enabled coordinated care, post-attempt assertive aftercare, reductions in childhood adversity, and increasing youth employment. Together, these measures could effectively reduce self-harm hospitalisations (suicide attempts) by 28.5% and suicide deaths by 29.3%. Introducing additional interventions beyond the best performing suite of interventions produced only marginal improvement in population level impacts, highlighting that 'more is not necessarily better.' Other Initiatives The Centre provided a serie rs entitled "Flattening the mental health and suicide curve post-COVID-19 - Beyond prevention, which active interventions will help?" One of these webinars discusses dynamic models and interventions to inform decision-makers responding to the mental health and suicide prevention crisis due to COVID-19. Another focused on youth mental health from the perspective of seven carers who have had experience in or are ongoingly supporting their young person to navigate the mental health system. This webinar, led by the carers themselves, explored topics such as the difficulties in supporting loved ones with suicidal thoughts and behaviours. We openly discuss the potential to make positive changes to mental health advocacy, access, stigma and discrimination to #FlattenthelVlentalHealthCurve. Members of our Centre also contributed to development of papers comparing Australia's response to COVID-19 with other parts of the world, specifically in relation to mental health. 3 Our Key Findings Modelling published by the Brain and Mind Centre found that employment programs are the single most effective strategy for mitigating the adverse mental health impacts of the COVID-19 crisis. This work underscored the importance of sustaining the duration of the program, indicating that extending employment programs (primarily JobKeeper and JobSeeker) from May 2021 to May 2022 could prevent an additional 9,272 ED presentations, 1,114 self-harm hospitalisations, and 123 live losi :o over the period 2020-2025. These findings focused largely on working age populations and men. Other modelling explored COVID-19's impact on women, finding they had been disproportionately affected by the pandemic through structurally imposed vulnerabilities, likely to increase the mental health gender gap particularly as a result of increased rates of job loss due to their greater representation in precarious employment and ineligibility for JobKeeper. This report recommended that gender-informed policies are needed, combining economic, social, and mental health services interventions with a gender equity lens. Our COVID-19 modelling found that associated social disruption had greatest adverse impacts on young people. We were able to suggest a suite of services to address these impacts, combining social connectedness programs, technology-enabled care, post suicide-attempt care, Direct Access to specialist services, and increased capacity in psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health nurses, social workers, occupational therapists and other skilled allied service practitioners. Such a combination could yield the maximum benefit for reducing psychological distress, self-harm hospitalisations (10.6%), suicide deaths (11.2%), and mental health related Emergency Department (ED) presentations (9%). While modelling enables new capacity to identify problems and their potential solutions, our final key finding over this period was that as they currently stood, Australian mental health services were inadequate and not able to respond effectively to this scale of social disruption. Conclusion Systems modelling and simulation offers a robust approach to leveraging best available research, data, and expert knowledge in a way that helps decision makers respond to the unique characteristics and drivers of mental illness and suicidality. These models are evolving rapidly. The Brain and Mind Centre is a leader in this process. There is now compelling evidence to indicate the merit of increased use of these modelling techniques to plan and organise better and more accurate responses to mental illness, including in times of crisis. Centre staff would be delighted to discuss our work in systemic modelling and in response to COVID- 19, with the Inquiry, at your convenience. 4 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0087 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0088 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0088.pdf University of Sydney Infectious Diseases Institute (Sydney ID) response to Call for submissions and evidence to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry Sydney ID (https://www.sydney.edu.au/infecticus-diseases-institute/ ), conducts research that improves understanding of the complex interactions that fuel the emergence and spread of infectious diseases, especially in the Indo-Pacific region. We aspire to mitigate the health and socioeconomic impacts of these infections, by providing novel insight and practical solutions. We support basic, translational and implementation research and encourage a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to infection, immunity, and biosecurity - linking pathogens, humans, and animal hosts, engineered systems and the natural environment in a One World, One Health framework. In 2021, Sydney ID brought together groups of discipline experts to articulate key lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic response and to encourage constructive national discussion in Australia and regionally. This led to a publication (Key lessons from the COVID-19 public health response in Australia.) and a report by the Open Society and Sydney Policy Lab (The Great Australian renovation; attached) both in the public domain. Key lessons identified were: 1) Border closures and lockdowns worked as a crisis measure, but we need a better understanding of when and how these measures should be deployed to maximise their protective effect and minimise adverse impacts. 2) Disease modelling was valuable to assist decision-making and public understanding of risk, but its limitations should be adequately communicated, and transparency is key. 3) At a national level, comprehensive data were not readily available to guide decision making, which requires careful assessment of optimal disease surveillance and response structures. 4) The pandemic demonstrated the utility of advanced pathogen genomics and novel vaccine technology, raising the bar for future disease surveillance and response. 5) Timely, clear, and open communication, combined with decision making that is evidence-informed and as consultative as possible, is essential to maintain population cooperation and trust. 6) Existing preparedness plans were insufficient and major system weaknesses were exposed in the Australian residential aged-care sector. 7) Effective Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) measures were important to keep health-care workers safe and to limit population transmission. 8) The interests of children and young people were at times compromised and it is important to ensure adequate representation of their best interests in decision making processes. 9) Epidemic risk should be recognised as a standing threat with ongoing investment in workforce development and research. 10) Nationalistic pandemic responses demonstrated the need for stronger global solidarity and regional engagement. Australia was lucky to avoid the worst effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, but as a society we experienced many negative impacts. This submission focuses on key lessons 1 and 4-10 from our Lancet paper. Points 2 and 3 were covered in our submission to the Australian CDC consultation. Border closures and lockdowns worked as a crisis measure, but we need a better understanding of when and how these measures should be deployed to maximise their protective effect and minimise adverse impacts. As an island nation Australia delayed SARS-CoV-2 importation by closing its international borders, which bought time to develop and deploy effective protective measures, primarily vaccines. However, once the SARS-CoV-2 virus was globally established, and given incomplete vaccine protection against virus transmission, it became clear that the pursuit of a zero COVID policy was unattainable and that despite its benefits, strict border closures and lockdowns generated a multitude of adverse health, social and 1 economic impacts. These were not always adequately considered at the time. Within Australia, the closure of internal State borders was a natural extension of the national zero COVID approach, but created economic disruption and public confusion, as well as emotional hardship for those unable to travel to be with loved ones in times of distress, to return home or in the case of populous border regions, for workers and workplaces to provide essential services when their employment was located across the state border. Given that the legal responsibility for health protection resides at State/Territory level in Australia, some variation in practice depending on the local risk calculus was inevitable, however, the appropriateness of such variations must be judged against their adverse impacts. The pandemic demonstrated the utility of advanced pathogen genomics and novel vaccine technology, raising the bar for future disease surveillance and response. Advanced pathogen genomics provided key insights into the origin, evolution and spread of the pandemic. Its recognised value in outbreak identification, transmission tracking and better targeted public health control measures requires infrastructure investment and urgent workforce upskilling for us to benefit from these new developments. Effective implementation of COVID-19 vaccine programmes was the most important and most effective public health intervention. The pandemic identified the use of new vaccine technology and partnerships with industry to ensure local production capacity, as crucial health security investments. Timely, clear and open communication, combined with decision making that is evidence- informed and as consultative as possible, is essential to maintain population trust. Communication with specific at-risk populations was often lacking in the early phases of community lockdowns and vaccine rollout. It took time to organise appropriate messages and communication channels to reach culturally and linguistically diverse communities, First Nations people, those living with a disability and other groups at risk of severe disease. Some response measures were deemed to be inequitable, leading to mistrust in government. Building and preserving public trust requires decision-making that is evidence-informed, transparent, and consultative in process. It requires community partnership, consideration of the social determinants of health, health systems that are functional and accessible, and communication that is culturally appropriate and inclusive. Communication should be multidirectional and involve systematic avenues for listening to communities and stakeholders in different sectors, along with informing them. To support behaviour change, messaging should inform and educate in a way that considers health literacy, makes information easy to access, and engages trusted spokespeople. Existing preparedness plans were insufficient and major system weaknesses were exposed in an under-resourced Australian residential aged-care sector. State and Territory pandemic preparedness plans were mostly modelled on influenza (H5N1 and then H1N1), but regular revision and simulation of these plans dropped off in the years leading up to the COVID- 19 pandemic. Intra-pandemic, critical workforce and supply chain interruptions emphasised the importance of whole of government planning and national self-sufficiency during a global crisis. Major age-specific variability in disease virulence complicated response efforts. Children and young people experienced a relatively low risk of severe disease, with a dramatic increase in the disease risk and burden among older individuals. As highlighted by the recent Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety, the pandemic exposed major system weaknesses in the Australian residential aged-care sector. Delays in vaccination, poor infection control practices, inadequate planning for staffing disruptions and failure to meet the social and emotional needs of residents and families during times of loneliness and end of life care were particularly distressing. The interests of children and young people were at times compromised and it is important to ensure adequate representation of their best interests in decision making. Fortunately, young people experienced a low incidence of severe disease. Unfortunately, messages from paediatric health care professionals to reduce unwarranted fear and emotional distress in children and their parents/carers were at times actively suppressed. Decision makers did not adequately consider the 2 detrimental impacts of school or playground closures on their education, emotional and physical development, and mental health, as well as the unequal effect of these measures on children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Going forward, an Australian national mitigation and recovery plan is needed to ensure that in future outbreaks, equal education access is prioritised and that the damage done to physical and mental health is addressed. Schools should be classified as providing an essential service, with school staff vaccinated as a priority group and remote learning only considered as a last resort. Epidemic risk should be recognised as a standing threat, with ongoing investment in workforce development and research. Typically, pandemic research receives a funding boost after a major disease outbreak, but interest dwindles quickly once the epidemic recedes. General priority areas for pandemic research include improved understanding of pathogen evolution and spread, as well as disease surveillance, prevention, pandemic preparedness and response, health system resilience, human behaviour and effective risk communication. The One Health dimension of infections that emerge at the human-animal interface, including the effects of climate change, reduced ecosystem services and biodiversity collapse, are complex problems that require integrated cross-disciplinary approaches. The pandemic demonstrated the need for stronger global solidarity and regional engagement. COVID-19 put global inequities into stark relief and high-income countries (including Australia) did not always demonstrate strong global solidarity. The fact that Australia’s decision to caution against AstraZeneca vaccine use affected vaccine confidence in the region should be carefully considered in Australia’s public health communication response and emphasises the need to assist countries with evidence-informed decision making that is appropriate for their specific context. At a time when society faces major existential threats, it is more important than ever for all countries to embrace regional and global solidarity. It is also the only way to effectively manage an evolving global health threat and to prevent and prepare for similar future challenges. The Open Society/Sydney Policy Lab report made 12 recommendations with a strong focus on young people, who experienced the greatest setback from the COVID-19 pandemic, despite being at minimal risk for severe disease. It recommended strengthening the integrity and accountability of our public institutions to rebuild trust in government. Priorities included the establishment of a national office for multicultural affairs and re-establishment of multiculturalism as a priority, together with a national anti-racism strategy to ensure equality, respect, and cooperation between all Australians. Programs to strengthen both communications by our public health officials and the scientific community, and the ‘scientific literacy’ of the Australian people, should allow people to better understand how diseases spread and how scientists generate and use evidence to inform judgements. They should also provide the knowledge needed to filter out disinformation and identify trusted sources. Critically, there must be strong bilateral engagement with respective communities to better understand their priorities and concerns and together develop tailored, culturally appropriate programs that take into account variations in health literacy. 3 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0088 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0089 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0089.pdf Key health response measures The govt health response was damaging to the families and communities. The hype over the number of 'cases' of covid was the data to push an experimental vaccine onto everyone. Very poor use of commonsense. Now we see the damage experienced by the community from this. How come there is an 11% increase in deaths since the jab was rolled out? Vaccine mandates affected my family and I. (not covid!) I did not comply to the mandate for forced vaccinations and was suspended from| school! I was wary of the rushed experimental vaccine and was not offered a risk assessment or even talk to my employer about compassionate grounds for our situation. I was originally suspended with pay, but then without pay I have been an exemplary employee with the why am I being treated as if I have been unprofessional ? I have suffered loss, harm and hurt through this terrible experience. When I was placed on suspension without pay, I lost income and was very stressed. We have suffered serious stress from this ordeal. I have the doctors' certificates to confirm this. For the first time ever I had (evidence can be provided). I looked into other employment but the directive froreed me to be available during normal business hours. I was worried I would be in breach of the directive if they tried to contact me. Teaching has not just been a job for me, but a passion, and I was forced to consider resigning. How much longer could I stay in limbo before giving up a^^^^fcareer that I had put everything into, so that I could find a means to support my family? I was worried about becoming unemployed and unskilled as I had spent years of time and money into being a I was Please use your role to recommend commonsense to the govt. Vaccines and lockdowns are not the answer to health emergencies - healthy diet, less stress and social interactions will help strengthen your God given immune system which is infinitely more efficient and effective to control these viruses. thank you for your time, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0089 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0090 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0090.pdf Personal Story of Discrimination I was employed for more than my employer. I successfully remotely from my home office while in Covid 19 lockdown. However, I was fired ifrom my job for not registering as Vaccinated. I lost my income and as I was living in^HI was not allowed to work in my field until at least^^^^^^| Therefore I lost my ability to support my family financially and will not recover from that financial impact. I also becameThis has also impacted my family and friends^^^^^ ln^^^^^|my Employer said Vaccine mandates are the responsibility of the Government not Businesses. The^^| Government did not mandate the Covid 19 Vaccine I requested a risk assessment that shows why vaccination is the best and only control for me against harm from Covid-19, and or the possible impacts from the vaccination and of which should include a comprehensive assessment of potential harm from the vaccine. The company never provided this to me. Since then evidence from the Western Australian Government (among other states) (Western Australian Vaccine Safety Surveillance - Annual Report 2021, Produced by the Immunisation Program, Communicable Disease Control Directorate and the COVID- 19 Vaccination Program, Department of Health, Western Australia) states that there werel 0,726 individual adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) reports in 2021, up from 270 in 2020. Of these AEFI, 10,428 (97%) occurred after a COVID-19 vaccine. I wasso therefore not taking a vaccine meant I had no risk from any of the adverse reactions identified by the Government. The^^^^^^f impact to me from being fired, not being allowed to work is far greater than any impact the virus has had on me or my family. Taking a vaccination would have only increased the likelihood of some negative impact. 1. Key health response measures Governance of the Vaccination should include minimising financial, mental and physical impacts to all people in Australia including non-vaccinated. This means not mandating the Vaccination to maintain employment as there are also injuries from vaccination and people need to make there own informed choice. Heard immunity did not stop the transmission of Covid 19. Isolation of healthy (people not showing symptoms from Covid 19) should not occur. Isolation people at risk and managing their immune health is more strategic and reduced impact to the larger population mentally, physically and financially. 2. Mechanisms to better target future responses to the needs of particular populations If the Government wants to mandate vaccination for any type of employment they must then hold the job for that person and continue to pay them in full. This will reduce the likelihood of negative financial and mental impacts to those people. People if they can should be able to work from home rather than be vaccinated. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0090 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0091 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0091.pdf Consumers Health Forum of Australia SUBMISSION COMMONWEALTH GOVERNMENT COVID-19 RESPONSE INQUIRY December 2023 INTRODUCTION Consumers Health Forum (CHF) is the national peak body representing the interests of Australian healthcare consumers and those interested in healthcare consumer affairs. CHF works to achieve safe, quality, and timely healthcare for all Australians, supported by accessible health information and systems. At the heart of CHF's policy agenda is consumer-centred care, including government response to pandemics such as COVID-19. CHF appreciates the opportunity to provide consumer insight into the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response inquiry. Consumer co-design and engagement reached an all-time low with the Covid-19 pandemic response. Now, however, we are given the opportunity to learn from the successes and challenges experienced in the past three years and, more importantly, ensure that consumers' voices can improve resilience and preparedness for future pandemics. EVIDENCE OUTLINE The evidence for this submission originates from evidence directly collected and analysed by CHF, encompassing the first three years of response to COVID-19. The broader framework and guidance for this submission have been provided by the 2020 CHF Position Statement "Ethical Issues Arising from the COVID-19 Pandemic1, which outlined the key elements of an ethical decision-making process and the pathway to recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic from a consumer perspective. The 2021 Consumer Sentiment Survey (CSS)2, a survey of 5100 Australians aged 18 and over aimed at understanding the health system from a consumer point of view, was conducted in October 2021 at the height of the COVID-19 Delta outbreak. The survey contained a set of questions specific to COVID-19. November 2023 consultation was conducted via CHF's Australia's Health Panel (AHP), CHF's interactive platform collecting the views of Australians about the state of the nation's healthcare system. 71 Consumers responded to our National COVID-19 Response Inquiry questionnaire, providing invaluable insight. KEY HEALTH RESPONSE MEASURES: TESTING According to the CSS, up to October 2021, consumers were generally satisfied with COVID-19 testing services. 89% of survey respondents who had attended a testing facility reported high satisfaction levels. However, recent consumer engagement through AHP has shown a drastic decline in satisfaction with COVID-19 testing, with only 42% of respondents expressing satisfaction and 20% reporting disruptive delays. ■CHF (2020). Ethical Issues Arising from the COVID-19 Pandemic: Consumer Position Statement. CHF: Canberra. Accessed 29 November 2023 https://chf.orq.au/sites/default/files/docs/consumer position statement- _ethical_issues_arising_from_the_covid-19_pandemic_final.pdf 2 Zurynski, Y., Ellis, L. A., Dammery, G., Smith, C.L., Halim, N., Ansell, J., Gillespie, J., Caffery, L, Vitangcol, K., Wells, L, Braithwaite, J.(2022) The Voice of Australian Health Consumers: The 2021 Australian Health Consumer Sentiment Survey. Report prepared for the Consumers Health Forum of Australia https://chf.org.au/sites/default/files/pchss consumersentimentsurveyreport final3.pdf Consumers Health Forum of Australia ACN: 146 988 927 | ABN: 82 146 988 927 | 7B /17 Napier Close, Deakin ACT 2600 www.chf.orq.au PC Box 73 | Deakin West ACT 2600 CHF Consumers Health Forum of Australia Most importantly, 14% of AHP respondents have highlighted issues with testing site accessibility. Consumers reported that testing sites were not easily accessible for people with chronic conditions and disabilities: long queues in the car under the sun exacerbated some respondent's chronic health conditions. Consumers who live with restricted mobility were not offered arrangements to be more comfortable while waiting and were forced to be in pain for hours on end or to leave before getting tested. Testing was simply not an option for others, as they could not drive, and testing locations were too far to reach. CHF recommends immediate development of accessibility requirement standards fortesting sites, which should include facilities that can accommodate various accessibility needs. These standards must comply with the Disability (Access to Premises - Buildings) Standards 20103. Still, they must be refined through co­ design with Consumers (who have first-hand experience) and Infection Prevention and Control specialists (who are best placed to inform how accessibility requirements can be met without increasing the risk of infection). Not only will this make it easier for consumers to access testing, but it will improve pandemic response at a population level: those living with one or more chronic health conditions are unfortunately most affected by novel pathogens. Improving testing accessibility for vulnerable populations will contribute to better testing rates, and reduced infection rates where it matters the most. KEY HEALTH RESPONSE MEASURES: VACCINATION Up to October 2021, consumers reported high satisfaction with COVID-19 vaccination hubs, with 90.2% of respondents reporting being satisfied about their experience. 2023 consultation via AHP suggests that consumers were satisfied with the care provided by frontline vaccinating staff even later in the pandemic. As delays with vaccine procurement dominated the media, what disrupted consumers the most was the lag between vaccine eligibility announcements, and actual vaccine availability. Consumers understand that the COVID-19 vaccines were developed rapidly, and that vaccine eligibility had to adapt to new evidence and procurement considerations. Consumers however were frustrated by the lack of reliable and timely information at their point of care about their eligibility for a vaccine and their ability to receive one. Consumers heard of changes in vaccine eligibility via mass communication. Still, they felt stranded when their clinic would not provide clear instructions and the opportunity to book their vaccination appointment. CHF recommends that consumers be involved in co-designing and developing better communication channels by which vaccine updates and recommendations from the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation are communicated and implemented in primary care. This involves the use of language that is more accessible and its rapid adoption not only online - a space that remains inaccessible to many consumers - but also by the healthcare professionals that consumers traditionally seek health information from (GPs, Pharmacists, Nurses, etc). Similarly to testing, CHF also recommends that standard requirements be co-designed with consumers to improve the accessibility of vaccination sites. Consumers who found COVID-19 testing inaccessible encountered the same issue at vaccination hubs. KEY HEALTH RESPONSE MEASURES: ACCESS TO COVID-19 RELATED HEALTH INFORMATION Consumers found general health information about COVID-19 and its effects on health more accessible than information about COVID-19 vaccination. Consumers living with chronic and rare conditions, however, had trouble finding information on how COVID-19 would relate to their specific and pre-existing health concerns. 3 Australian Government (2010) - Disability (Acess to Premises - Buildings) Standards https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2010L00668 Consumers Health Forum of Australia ACN: 146 988 927 | ABN: 82 146 988 927 | 7B /17 Napier Close, Deakin ACT 2600 www.chf.orq.au | PC Box 73 | Deakin West ACT 2600 CHF Consumers Health Forum of Australia CHF recommends that all governments and service providers adopt a comprehensive approach that gives communities a voice and enables more rapid translation of research findings in health information resources that are accurate and tailored to the needs of consumers. Consumers have also expressed concerns about the current lack of health information on the evolution of COVID-19, including new variants and new vaccines. CHF argues that a strong pandemic response is an enduring one. Consumers must be thoroughly informed about current epidemiological trends and new vaccines to be best equipped to protect themselves from the risk of reinfection. BROADER HEALTH SUPPORTS: A NEED FOR BETTER SERVICES HELPING CONSUMERS IN LOCKDOWN AND ISOLATION Services provided to consumers during lockdowns and isolation are among the lowest-rated services by consumers during the initial COVID-19 response. According to the 2021 CSS, of the survey respondents who reported severe levels of psychological distress - 38.9% used a telephone helpline, and 19.6% accessed mental health help via email or webchats. Many AHP survey respondents who accessed mental health support services while confined at home found them inadequate. When mental health needs surpassed the scope of practice of helplines, consumers were told to seek help through primary care providers, left to navigate GP and therapist shortages without assistance. AHP data from November 2023 shows that 19% of survey respondents did not access any support services not for lack of need but rather because they were not aware that these services were available. Of those consumers who accessed support services other than mental health support, many experienced delays long waiting times, and were provided with inconsistent information by operators at the other end of the line. CHF calls for a thorough, meaningful process and outcome evaluation of these services, which must engage and hear from Consumers. A comprehensive evaluation does not conflate program outputs (such as the number of calls received) with the actual outcomes, such as consumer-reported experience and outcome measures. Only by including consumer-reported outcomes in post-implementation evaluation will these services be able to be honed and improved for use in future pandemics. BROADER HEALTH SUPPORTS: TELEHEALTH AND DIGITAL HEALTH SERVICES PLAYED A FUNDAMENTAL ROLE, BUT iETTER CO-DESIGN WITH CONSUMERS IS NEEDED The ability of the system to pivot to digital options is, for consumers, one of the significant successes of the COVID-19 response and the health system at large. According to the 2021 CSS, 85% of consumer respondents reported high satisfaction levels for Telehealth. Satisfaction remained very high for consumers involved in the 2023 AHP consultations. Some of the most common issues about Telehealth were related to its early implementation: many consumers found the earlier iteration of Telehealth software quite clunky, and others found a lack of consistency in the ability of health professionals to pivot to providing care remotely. Most consumers found these issues resolved as software improved and care providers became more used to remote consultations. Due to the benefits that Telehealth is still providing to the community, CHF calls for the maintenance and expansion of Telehealth services and the removal of barriers to its access (such as, for example, mandated in-person visits to clinics to be eligible for subsequent Telehealth appointments). CHF thinks the best strategy for Telehealth and Digital Health Services to play an even better role in future pandemics is to become a permanent feature within Medicare. Through continuous use and evaluation of telehealth outside the initial pandemic response, these systems will be best placed to develop resilience and responsiveness during the surge in demand that future pandemics will command. Consumers Health Forum of Australia ACN: 146 988 927 | ABN: 82 146 988 927 | 7B /17 Napier Close, Deakin ACT 2600 www.chf.orq.au | PC Box 73 | Deakin West ACT 2600 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0091 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0092 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0092.pdf COVID -19 RESPONSE INQUIRY SUBMISSION Introduction My name is Anne Heath Mennell and I live on the shores of in^^^^J My submission is written from the perspective of a private citizen. I have no medical or science expertise so my submission is focused on my personal experience of that time, in the hope that my views will assist in improving our response to future pandemics or similar emergencies. Comments Early stages In early 2020 I was 71 years old with a pre-existing condition which reduced This put me in two high risk categories. I will never forget the fear as the virus spread around the world, people were dying in their thousands with hospitals overwhelmed. Drone vision of graves being dug in New York City is still vivid. When the virus reached Australia my fear intensified, not helped by several serious, early mistakes, made as authorities scrambled to deal with the unprecedented situation. I am retired so I was able to stay at home as much as possible and avoid crowded places while public health departments tried to source face-masks, hand sanitizers, PRE for health workers and put in place other preventative measures. It became apparent that Australia did not make many of these vital items, nor did we have emergency stockpiles so there were severe shortages. Given the time since the last pandemic, this is understandable to a point, but it did not help to stem the fears of vulnerable communities. It is obvious that we need to review supply chains of vital products, invest in our own manufacturing capacity, wherever possible, and maintain emergency stocks to help deal with future disasters. Quarantine In the early stages, when numbers of cases and deaths were rising rapidly, the use of isolation and quarantine to try to slow the spread was really important for public confidence. Unfortunately, mistakes were made here too as authorities had to make and implement difficult decisions with inadequate information, resources, experience and facilities. In the future, we need to have established protocols in place which enable citizens overseas to be repatriated quickly and for people to be quarantined where necessary. The state government should be commended for ensuring that homeless people were provided with safe, albeit temporary, accommodation. By allowing indigenous leaders to manage their communities in their own ways, governments helped to protect vulnerable, remote communities. Future quarantine plans should include frontline health-care workers who may not wish to put their families at risk. At least Victoria now has a quarantine facility, which should be maintained so that it can be re-opened quickly, if needed, either for quarantine or during other disasters. Lockdowns and Border Closures Lockdowns became very divisive in Victoria and I should presage my remarks by clarifying that I live in a rural area, own my own home, don't have school-age children and was not separated from close family. Our experience of lockdowns was not as severe as for those in metro Melbourne. Nevertheless, it is difficult to see what the government could have done differently to try to reduce the spread of the virus at a time when there were no treatments for those who contracted it, no vaccines to reduce the chances of someone becoming positive and deaths were increasing rapidly. Australia's federal structure made border closures unprecedented and politically divisive. There were tragic stories of people separated from dying loved ones and huge difficulties for border communities such as Albury-Wodonga. Australia's size means long supply chains across state borders. There was much confusion and anxiety, especially when borders were closed with almost no warning. Again, mistakes were made but it is hard to see what else governments could have done, at a time when stopping or slowing the spread of the virus was the priority. Any loss of civil liberties was temporary and necessary to ensure a whole-of-community response to a devastating, life and death situation. If such a situation was to recur, we need to have clear strategies and frameworks in place so that public health officials, politicians, essential industries, transport, emergency organisations etc. all know what needs to be done, who will do it and how it will be done. Communication and Coordination In extraordinary times, reliable information is vital. Victoria's premier gave press conferences every day, giving updates and explanations. He has been strongly criticised by some people for his handling of the pandemic. Certainly, mistakes were made and issues mishandled but I am not sure that anyone else could have done anything different or better. Victoria was criticised for doing things differently from other states. Given the many differences between the states this seems sensible but the establishment of the National Cabinet was a very good move. Arguments between Commonwealth and state governments and between state and territory governments could be discussed and decisions made and coordinated for the good of the whole country, with politics minimised. An apolitical National Cabinet should be established at an early stage of any future situation to minimise competition and political posturing and to maximise cooperation and coordination for the national good. Vaccinations Once vaccines became available, supply couldn't keep up with demand and Australia had to make decisions which, in hindsight, might not have been the best ones. Obtaining and then distributing vaccines could have been handled better and were beset by misinformation and disinformation campaigns. I can't really offer any suggestions on how this matter could be better handled in the future, other than having the capacity to develop and produce vaccines ourselves and having clear priorities in terms of distribution to vulnerable groups such as people in aged care. Addressing hostile commentary should be a specific review area for the Inquiry. Non-health responses I commend governments for providing financial assistance to employees and organisations during lockdowns. However, the discovery that some companies used government funds to increase profits and were unwilling to return un-needed funds was shocking. The law should be amended to ensure this never happens again. The exclusion of universities from financial support schemes and the treatment of overseas students was ideological discrimination by the then federal Government which should never be repeated. Conclusion Many mistakes were made and, undoubtedly, some things could have been handled better. I believe that almost everyone was trying to do their best in unprecedented circumstances, working in the dark in a very high-stakes situation. If I had caught Covid in 2020, I may not have survived. When I did test positive, it was with a less virulent strain, I was fully vaccinated and had access to anti-virals. I experienced only a mild infection, with no ill effects. It could have been very different. The actions taken in 2020 and 2021 bought us time to develop vaccines and save lives. I am very grateful. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the work of the Inquiry. I hope that its recommendations will ensure that we are better prepared for the next challenge. Anne Heath Mennell Tek^^^^M ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0092 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0093 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0093.pdf Submission to the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry ABS Australian mortality data review (1 January 2021- 30 July 2023) Peter Paradice Phone 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 Peter Paradice Document Control Project code: 20231215 Issued by: Peter Paradice Date of Final Doc: 15 December 2023 File Name: PFParadice_CofA_COVID19_lnquiry_20231215_Rev0 Page 2 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 Executive summary The past 4 years (2020-2023) stand as a salutary background against which future trust in public health should be considered. In 2020 most governments around the world subscribed to the story of an existential health crisis and a one size fits all final defence solution for the masses in the form of patented, novel inoculation drugs. One group of drugs was based on mRNA and the other on adenovirus technology. Australia's initial isolationism during the early COVID scare provided the opportunity later to obtain an insight not available to most other nations. The key to achieving this insight is the published ABS mortality metadata for points in time prior to 2020, through the period prior to the commencement of inoculant rollouts, to the period after the commencement of rollouts, and beyond. When the ABS data is examined using techniques of identification by exclusion, it shows unintended shortening of life by a "cause unknown". Metadata from global COVID, Australian COVID and the Australian inoculation program lends itself to posing some reasonable hypotheses relating to excess deaths. For those hypotheses to be further substantiated they must be tested against unadulterated micro­ data. This submission urges the Commonwealth of Australia COVID-19 Inquiry (the Inquiry hereon) to secure and release the raw microdata of mortality for analysis from January 2020 until the present time. Facts 1. Significant excess deaths appeared in the ABS records as soon as use of the novel inoculants began in early 2021. 2. COVID attributed deaths were immaterial to excess deaths until (6 months later) in July 2021. 3. 5,125 excess deaths were experienced prior to significant COVID death attribution began. 4. Ongoing excess deaths against pre-pandemic baselines continue to be reported by the ABS. 5. Excess unexplained deaths for the 30months since the start of the vaccine rollout have now exceeded 40,000 people. 6. The WA Government has published evidence of a large increase in reported vaccine injury since the start of the COVID vaccine roll out. 7. The British Medical Journal quotes research indicating that no more than 10% of serious vaccine injuries are officially reported when reporting is left to the dead and injured. 8. Infection with the virus confers superior immunity to COVID than the novel inoculants. 9. No novel COVID inoculants have moved beyond provisional approval by the TGA. Observations 1. Based on the WA injury data (and research, noted above in point 7, indicating underreporting) it can be extrapolated that between 1 and 5m Australians experienced COVID inoculation injury. 2. Many of those experiencing inoculation injury will be the vulnerable with compromised immune systems. It is possible that some vulnerable (and healthy) people when faced with the shock of the inoculant, died. 3. Some excess deaths were caused by COVID however many COVID attributed deaths were from co-morbidities other than COVID. 4. 2023 COVID Inquiries in England and Scotland have heard that older patients testing positive for COVID were in many cases "written off" and treated with "end-of-life" programs or "euthanasia-type" interventions (or had lifesaving interventions withheld) that contributed to their demise. This response increased the number of COVID attributed deaths. Page 3 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 5. Statistics indicate that many people with death attributed to COVID did not have their lives shortened. 6. Excess deaths in the meta-data are temporally correlated to novel "vaccine" use. The relationship between "cause unknown" and "COVID vaccines" should be analysed, and causation ruled out. 7. Marketing imperatives may have driven the "COVID vaccine" narrative and thus the possible overuse of high-risk drugs with possible catastrophic injuries and death for some people for whom the knowable benefit-cost ratio was negative (particularly for those who had acquired natural immunity through viral infection). A novel technology was pushed that was a radical departure from the technologies people thought they knew and understood and was then promoted under false pretences to cohorts of the population who stood to gain little or no benefit from the technology. Loss of trust During the COVID panic and in the period of heavy coercion (at the release of the novel COVID inoculants), young people were told they would be responsible for killing their grandparents if they did not have the inoculation. It became a "pandemic of the unvaccinated". Australians were also told that natural infection did not confer immunity and that inoculation was the only mechanism to avoid hospitalisation and almost certain death. It now transpires that the novel drugs neither stopped transmission or infection in the inoculated cohort. It is also established that natural infection confers better immunity than the manmade inoculants. Australians now know that this claim and other important claims were misinformation from their health authorities. Tellingly, against the orthodox narrative of the day, as a general principle, vaccines are deployed as a protection for the individual receiving the drug - not for the protection of others. In addition to these revelations Australians are becoming aware that the ongoing excess death rate is more highly correlated with the use of the novel drugs than the virus. The consequence of advice from authorities turning out to be misinformation is likely to become manifest in active distrust of the Australian health authorities and the profession. Private manufacturers striving for business success (profitability) and protected by government indemnity are more able to take risks with human lives than businesses liable for product failure affecting human health. An awareness that provisionally approved products are indemnified by the user themselves (taxpayer) may cause scepticism (loss of trust) in the products. Restoring trust The restoration of lost trust in Australian health authorities is an important challenge to be resolved. As matters stand, there is a significant danger that if a real national health emergency arose the level of trust in Government is so low that reasonable people might actively resist and thwart genuinely sensible health measures. This not an ideal situation for Australia. The author knows of people (pro- vaxxers pre-2021) who refuse to take a vaccine of any sort as long as the current incongruous COVID narrative remains unaddressed. Several initiatives will be required to address the trust issue. Implementing a full cost recovery user pays system for the people choosing to use the novel COVID drugs will be helpful to testing the commitment of Australians to these provisionally approved drug interventions. Page 4 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 Discussing and taking action to stop the excess deaths will be crucial to restoration of trust. Removal of indemnity protection for "COVID vaccine" manufacturers will be "but a small step" in a long stairway to Australian Government redemption and restoration of trust. Perhaps it is better for democracy and more appropriate that Australians remain highly vigilant and more sceptical of government and public health leadership than in the past. The format of the 2023 Albanese COVID Inquiry will certainly assist in sustaining low levels of trust. A further suggested action that could be deployed to build trust would be to place all information submitted to the Kruk Inquiry before an international panel of eminent persons (chaired by a respected Australian) for review. This parallel international panel of review could be commissioned to deliver a report addressing the same elements as the Kruk Inquiry with the trust that comes with "no past connection" to the management of the Australian COVID event. Appropriate people to sit on such an international panel of review could include: (past Deputy PM of Australia) Chair ^^^^■(USA) (UK) ^■(UK) (Belgium) The partial remedy The long road to restoring trust includes reassurance that in the case of vaccine injury proper avenues of redress are available. An absolute and unqualified blanket ban on Commonwealth- backed indemnities is totally justified and will help with that process. The material in the body of this advisory submission demonstrates some of the authors research, and perceptions regarding the extent of the hurt Australians have experienced from the Australian government's (State and Federal) responses and management of the COVID-19 event. This material should assist in managing expectations regarding public health and provide some insights into, and resources for, the restoration of trust in a manner that is nuanced, responsible and sensitive. Page 5 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 Table of contents 1 Background................................................................................................................................... 8 2 Government responsibility......................................................................................................... 9 2.1 Inoculant ("vaccine") safety indicators................................................................................ 9 2.2 Responsible action............................................................................................................. 11 2.3 Vaccine advisory guidance changes...................................................................................11 3 A personal COVID story............................................................................................................. 12 3.1 Preamble - early exposure to COVID19............................................................................. 12 3.2 Family matters - the dead andinjured............................................................................... 13 3.3 Personal and private wreckage - microcosm of a nation.................................................. 14 4 Excess deaths and injuries......................................................................................................... 15 4.1 Excess deaths, cause unknown!......................................................................................... 15 4.2 ABS changes to the baseline for comparisons, present to past - 2023.............................16 4.3 Rare injuries....................................................................................................................... 17 4.4 COVID death misappropriation.......................................................................................... 17 4.5 Trust and confidence......................................................................................................... 19 4.6 Motivations of proponents of novel COVID inoculants..................................................... 19 5 Conclusions................................................................................................................................. 19 6 Bibliography................................................................................................................................ 20 7 Appendices.................................................................................................................................. 21 7.1 Appendix A. Australian ABS mortality data.......................................................................22 7.2 Appendix B. The "Cause Unknown" and Virus Activity Hypotheses................................. 28 7.3 Appendix C. The Logical COVID Conclusions......................................................................29 7.4 Appendix D: Graphs of Australian excess death rates by key affected age groupings January 2020 thru July 2023........................................................................................................................... 30 8 Attachments................................................................................................................................ 36 8.1 Attachment 1: Global, Australian and comparative nation Covid Vaccines 2021/23....... 36 8.2 Attachment 2: Inquiry of Health letter re COVID vaccine adverse events 30 July2022 ... 38 8.3 Attachment3: Dept, of Health letter re COVID vaccine adverse events 23 May 2022..... 41 8.4 Attachment4: Dept, of Health TGA advice re adverse events 24 December 2021........... 43 8.5 Attachment5: Dept, of Health letter re COVID vaccine justification 13 October 2021.... 45 8.6 Attachment6: Sydney Morning Herald article 22 September, 2022................................. 47 8.7 Attachment7: Covering letter to the P.F. Paradice submission to the CofA COVID lnquiry.48 8.8 Attachment 8: Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry TOR.............. 50 Page 6 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 List of figures Figure 1: Section 3.1 of the WA VSS Annual Report "Summary ofAEFI reports, Figure 2"..................... 9 Figure 2: Australian weekly vaccines and excess deaths 2020 thru July 2023...................................... 10 Figure 3 Field of sorrow silently informing of rare vaccine injuries at Shoalhaven Heads.................... 17 Figure 4 COVID attributed deaths \/S adjusted expected deficit deaths for Cerebrovascular, Respiratory, Isch-Heart......................................................................................................................... 18 Figure 5: Weekly excess deaths Jan2020/2021/2022/2023 vs Syear benchmark background -ABS release 30 July 2023.............................................................................................................................. 22 Figure 6 Weekly excess death% Jan 2020 thru July 2023 (against Syear average) - ABS release 30 July 2023...................................................................................................................................................... 24 Figure 7 Weekly COVID vaccines applied and excess deaths Jan 2021 thru July 2023 (against Syear average) -ABS...................................................................................................................................... 24 Figure 8 Extrapolated NET ""Cause Unknown"" deaths* from rollout commencement 7 February 2021 to 30 July 2023............................................................................................................................. 26 Figure 9 COVID attributed deaths \/S adjusted expected deficit deaths for Cerebrovascular, Respiratory, Isch-Heart......................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 10: Australian excess deaths%. All persons. January 2020 thru July 2023................................ 30 Figure 11: Australian excess deaths%. Persons 65-74. January 2020 thru July 2023........................... 30 Figure 12: Australian excess deaths%. Persons 75-84. January 2020 thru July 2023........................... 31 Figure 13: Australian excess deaths%. Persons over 84. January 2020 thru July 2023........................ 31 Figure 14: Australian excess deaths%. All Males. January 2020 thru July 2023................................... 32 Figure 15: Australian excess deaths%. Males 65-74. January 2020 thru July 2023.............................. 32 Figure 16: Australian excess deaths%. Males 74-84. January 2020 thru July 2023.............................. 33 Figure 17: Australian excess deaths%. Males over 84. January 2020 thru July 2023........................... 33 Figure 18: Australian excess deaths%. All Females. January 2020 thru July 2023................................ 34 Figure 19: Australian excess deaths%. Females 65-74. January 2020 thru July 2023.......................... 34 Figure 20: Australian excess deaths%. Females 75-84. January 2020 thru July 2023.......................... 35 Figure 21: Australian excess deaths%. Females over 84. January 2020 thru July 2023........................ 35 Figure 22: Global vaccination rates to 20/11/23 = 8,077 (1 in 4000 continue to use the products) ....36 Figure 23: Australia, Denmark, Switzerland, Ireland vaccination rates................................................ 37 Page 7 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 1 Background This advisory submission to the Commonwealth of Australia COVID-19 Response Inquiry (Inquiry hereon) has been prepared and presented by Peter Paradice of This submission includes an analysis and interpretation of ABS mortality metadata and provides details of personal experience and research to gain an understanding of the issues that lie behind the data as they relate to the response of Australian governments during the COVID-19 event. This paper is the authors personal work and is founded only on the official Government numbers. It does not rely on the data, interpretation, or information of others. The sources from which data and comments have been acquired for inclusion in this SUBMISSION include the following: • Australian Bureau of Statistics • Australian Federal Dept of Health • Personal experience Things have changed since January 2020. Many people have lost all trust in the integrity of Government, the medical establishment, the pharmaceutical industry, and the medical profession. While still living in a democracy, individuals are able, to express these sentiments without fear. This process is democracy at work. The so called "vaccines" for COVID referred to throughout this advisory are the mRNA and adenovirus vector inoculants purported to improve immunity and health outcomes (over all other options) against the now benign COVID-virus. The data examined in the past SOmonths contests the underlying premise, continually propagated by government, in respect of these novel "vaccines", that: ............ COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective. In respect of the novel COVID inoculants, the ongoing confidence of Australian authorities in this underlying premise is remarkable. With so much that seems unknown (and with data withheld) in current assessments of the untested (over time) mRNA and adenovirus vector drugs, it seems logically less risky at this juncture for Government to suspend the use of the novel inoculants. Unlike the Swiss, it seems unlikely that the Australian Government has the integrity, fortitude or will to suspend the novel COVID inoculation drugs. This being the case the acid test to ensure the drugs are truly safe and beneficial is for manufacturers (currently hiding behind the taxpayer warranty) to be made liable for compensation if the products are proven to cause injury or death. The charts in Attachment 1 indicate that the project is effectively over. The proponents of ongoing inoculation have lost the argument (using the wall of silence technique) against the Australian people. Page 8 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 2 Government responsibility 2.1 Inoculant ("vaccine") safety indicators COVID news in recent months includes the release of an important report from the Western Australian Government. The report is titled "WA Vaccine Safety Surveillance - Annual Report 2021". Please consider Section 3.1 of the report "Summary ofAEFI reports, Figure 2". See Figure 1 below. In 2020 the rate of reported vaccine injury per vaccine (pre-COVID inoculants) was 13 per 100,000 vaccines administered. In 2021 the rate of reported vaccine injury was 264 per 100,000 for the novel COVID immunisation drugs. This did not include a full year of the novel inoculants. The chart below from the WA report illustrates in graphic form the change in total vaccine injury in WA in the period 2017 thru 2021. 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 .nn la J FMAMJ JASONDJ FMAMJ JASONDJ FMAMJ JASONDJ FMAMJ JASONDJ FMAMJ JASOND 2017 2018 2019 | 2020 2021 Month and year of vaccination Figure 1: Section 3.1 of the WA VSS Annual Report "Summary ofAEFI reports, Figure 2". Does the Inquiry consider these rates of injury from the novel inoculants to be acceptable? Is it also possible some deaths passed unreported associated with inoculation. Prima facie, as explored later in this advisory, the adverse events system appears to be set up to ensure the injured and the dead are required to lodge their own reports. Does such a system lead to effective levels of reporting? The deaths metadata in Figure 2 (from ABS data) indicate that much worse is yet to be revealed in the 2022 vaccine injury data. The author suggests the Inquiry focus on injuries in January/February 2022. The author recommends the Inquiry gain access to the "as yet unpublished" 2022 WA data to assist in deliberations for the suspension of the COVID inoculation program. The meta-statistical implications highlighted in Figure 2 should be enough to motivate the Inquiry to establish the facts. After the Inquiry has established the facts from the 2022 WA report, this will assist frame the imperative (or otherwise) for the novel drug manufacturers to be exposed to normal avenues of litigation and compensation for the supply of products that injure and kill recipients in the future. Page 9 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 Australian Weekly Vaccines & Excess Deaths 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 18-Jun-23 -500 VaxlOOO's ■ Excess deaths Figure 2: Australian weekly vaccines and excess deaths 2020 thru July 2023 The British Medical Journal has reported research indicating that in respect of "serious vaccine injury", only 1 in 10 (10%) of the serious inoculant injuries are likely to be reported and recorded. (Recently published research papers indicate this reporting number could be as low as 2%.) If 90% underreporting is indeed the case, then the total serious injuries from the application of these COVID drugs in WA is 2,640 per 100,000 which, if extrapolated to the nation, (65m doses claimed administered) would indicate that as many as 1,716,000 Australians suffered a serious novel "vaccine" injury or death. This number begins to tally with a personal family statistical experience tabled later in this submission. The WA data and extrapolation is also consistent with the metadata and derivative hypotheses advised monthly by the author to the Minister for Health for each of the past 15 months. In the week-ending 24 March 2023, "Our World in Data" reports that a great many Australians were still being inoculated with these COVID drugs. Does that correlate with government information? Listed below are the latest reports of daily jabs for Australia and some other nations. - Australia 36,214 - Denmark 4 - Ireland 10 - Switzerland 18 The Swiss Government suspended use of the COVID "vaccines" in March 2023. The most recently reported inoculation rate is 18 Swiss people per day. Will the Inquiry please examine why the Page 10 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 Australian Government continues to spend taxpayer money on a program that some other responsible nations have apparently abandoned? 2.2 Responsible action The author encourages the Inquiry to urge the Minister for Health to take the Western Australian injury data and re-run the COVID risk assessments and associated benefit-cost of the ongoing promotion of the novel mRNA and adenovirus vector inoculants to the Australian population. Surely this information is a central element of informed consent. If the Department of Health has data at this time, that is in future proven to show that the risk of injury from the vaccine is now greater than the benefit, then is the behaviour of the health professors and doctors involved in perpetuating this drug experiment in keeping with key tenants of the Hippocratic Oath? Once the Minister for Health has conducted this risk/benefit/cost assessment it should be provided to the Australian people as the basis for "informed consent" to the current and ongoing promotion of the COVID inoculation program. The author also requests the Inquiry to recommend that the Minister release the microdata for deaths in the past 3.5 years including vaccine status of all people dying. Earlier advice is that the Dept does not have the data. (Attachment 3.) When this microdata is finally released Australian analysts will be wary to avoid the "gaslighting" problems identified in the UK when the data was made available, (see Footnote 1) Footnote 1: UK ONS vaccine microdata data analysis shortcomings 21/02/2023 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSLlfRRhJXO 2.3 Vaccine advisory guidance changes On 5 September 2023 the UK Government updated a decision summary report in respect of the Public Assessment Report for COVID-19 Vaccine Pfizer/BioNTech. The words used advise: This official UK decision to change vaccine advice for pregnant and breastfeeding women (previously categorised as vulnerable and therefore prioritised to be inoculated) is significant. On 23 September 2023 the UK Government updated a decision summary report in respect of the Pfizer inoculant. The words used advise (and do not include the word "rare" or "unusual"): Page 11 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 The author encourages the Inquiry to ask the Department of Health if it has examined the rate of Australian neonatal deaths in 2021 and 2022 against historical expectations, while accounting for the drug status of mothers? If the Dept, has examined this important mortality indicator, could the public be advised of the findings? If this mortality has not been investigated, does the Inquiry consider that it warrants enquiry? Pfizer themselves stated in a press release on 27/01/23 (link below) in respect of important safety information for their COVID inoculant products that potential recipients should (among other things) tell their vaccine provider if they: - "Are pregnant, plan to become pregnant, or are breastfeeding." - "Have had myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) or pericarditis (inflammation of the lining outside the heart)" https://www.pfizer.com/news/announcements/pfizer-responds-research-claims The unanswered question remains. How does the Inquiry interpret the inclusion by Pfizer of pregnancy as a risk factor in the safe use of the listed drugs? Does the Inquiry believe Pfizer could be blame shifting natural responsibility to Governments (providers) in the use of these words? As the parents of 3 daughters of current childbearing potential the authors' family are actively seeking an answer from Australian Govt, as to whether advice is under review to determine the ongoing designation of Australian pregnant women as vulnerable and therefore of high priority for having these novel drugs? Is the Inquiry able to assist with an answer to this question? 3 A personal COVID story 3.1 Preamble - early exposure to C0VID19 The author and the authors wife are a classic case study of the development of negative inoculant sentiment. Following is the story in more detail (written in the first person). In January 2020 my wife and I, while visiting our daughter in contracted a "disease" from our son-in-law On reflection and based on the symptoms, by March 2020 (back in Australia) we hypothesised it was the COVID Wuhan strain. We had a story to tell. We wanted to help assist the Government to gain understanding of this "killer disease", however we were outlawed from antibody testing for confirmation by Australian emergency legislation designed to control the medical profession. (Refer I) There was apparently no interest in our case! From then-on I developed deep distrust. The more I learn the more I distrusted the Government, experts, the medical profession and MSM. The issue was not that we claimed to have had COVID (which may or may not have been correct). The issue was that we were outlawed from establishing the fact and no one wanted to know. Page 12 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 The narrative propagated at the time was that infection with the virus did not confer improved immunity for the subject person against serious disease, hospitalisation, or death compared to a person who was uninoculated and naive to the disease. This narrative never really made sense to people with the most rudimentary understanding of science who viewed such claims with deep scepticism. It turned out to be an incorrect hypothesis. In the current lexicon it was misinformation. Peer reviewed research has since supported the hypothesis that viral infection confers immunity superior to that which is derived from a manmade spike protein inoculant. An Israeli trial, (follow the link) involving the Delta variant and the Pfizer vaccine concluded that "individuals who have had the SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from covid-19 vaccination" and "naturally acquired immunity confers stronger protection against infection and symptomatic disease caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 2-dose vaccine-indued immunity". The grave implications for this narrative and the consequent unnecessary application of high-risk drugs to those who had been exposed to the virus are discussed elsewhere in this submission. 3.2 Family matters - the dead and injured In my immediate family (the total group is about 16) the following people had the following coincidental events after having the inoculant. The author has been widely advised that correlation is not causation, and the author gathers now, from other "experts", the author is most likely suffering from a mental condition known as "causal hunger" in trying to understand these afflictions. Mother - 2 weeks following 2nd inoculation - - hospitalized stent fitted. (Correlation does not mean causation!) Sister - - Following 2nd inoculation - hospitalized undertaken to stabiliz, Correlation does not mean causation!) • Wife for several days following first inoculant. Bedridden for several days. :or 36 months (ongoing) following inoculations. Hands and wrists in pain and powerless. Only accepted 2nd inoculant for possibility of travelling to see granddaughter in Refuses any further inoculations. She has aged significantly in this time. (Correlation does not mean causation!) Daughter ■ after having 2nd mRNA inoculant. Diagnosed by doctor wit Refuses further inoculation. (Correlation does not mean causation!) Peripheral to the authors immediate family the author is aware of the following reaction. • Nephew Developed intense^^^^^| after first mRNA inoculant. He hid from further inoculations and remains in hiding. (Correlation does not mean causation!) These people (names can be supplied) were previously robust and healthy. What they think happened to them is irrelevant. None of these issues were logged as adverse events. Why would doctors not get involved with the patient to log these officially as temporal relational adverse events? Two fit, work associates ) were both given a Pfizer booster from the same batch at in January 2022. (Please examine the chart in Figure 2 for excess deaths in that period.) Within a week they were both hospitalised i one with a^^^Bepisode requiring Page 13 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 the other with other^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^that required treatment over many months. Those hospitalised and the person who insisted on them taking the booster to retain employment, now believe or suspect it was the vaccine. Neither episode was logged as an adverse event. (We all now know that correlation does not mean causation!) I can also refer you to others in my immediate circle who suffered long term injury and continue to suffer. My sister-in-law recounted a story recently of her sister-in-law (who worked as a US hospital chaplain until the end) who died of 2022 (cause unknown) in her sixties. Her name was^^^The author was told about six (6) causal options proffered by experts as possible explanations however the conclusion was "cause unknown". (Again, correlation does not mean causation!) A person very close to me is a senior nursing sister and helps run a nursing home of about 20 residents. She is in her mid-sixties and has seen many people die in her time in nursing. She considers she knows when the time is up in aged people. I believe she is competent. One Saturday afternoon in 2021 they "rounded up" (her words) all the residents in the home and inoculated them for COVID. In the morning two of the residents were dead. Her comment was that both these women were happy and well on Saturday night and "it was not their time". The author was advised that ALL the staff in that nursing facility believe the inoculation immediately killed 2 out of 20 of their residents in the application of the drug. When I encouraged her to speak out and log the events, she said they were all fearful of losing their jobs. That fear remains. They will not speak. I believe these deaths were not logged as adverse events. How could these events not be logged? Had the residents tested positive for COVID - would they NOT have been certified as COVID deaths? Many people do not want to discuss COVID "vax" issues for fear of ridicule and vilification. Why? The question is not that these people believe (or not) that these "rare" events were related to inoculation, the question is how could they not be officially logged with the temporal association? 3.3 Personal and private wreckage - microcosm of a nation If this experience is a microcosm of the Australian population, then by extrapolation 1 in 4 people had an adverse event to the inoculants. If 20m people have been inoculated then extrapolating from the microcosm, 5m people will have had some form of adverse event. Even if the ratio is 1 in 20, then Im people will have had adverse events. It seems inconceivable that if between Im and 5m people in Australia had adverse events, then some significant proportion, who are old and/or with relatively weak immune systems, would not have died from adverse side-effects. The Minister for Health (July 2022 Attachment 2) advised personally in a response letter that no more than 13 deaths (it is understood the TGA has since conceded 14) throughout Australia have been linked to the "vaccines". In light of the fact that there were net excess deaths (ie excess deaths less those attributed death with COVID) of more than 40,000 people in the 30months after the rollout began, is it possible the Ministerial advice could be inconsistent with the statistics? Page 14 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 What may appear complicated could be simplified if the Dept, released for public scrutiny the inoculation history micro-data for all deaths since the rollout began. Some pre-rollout micro-data would also be necessary. Age adjustment can be done. Smart analysts could run regressions to test the significance of the inoculants as an independent variable in the mix leading to death. Perhaps the models have already been built and for that reason the data will never be released. The Inquiry should ask the Dept, to supply the micro-data for the Inquiry to analyse. If the data supported the orthodox narrative, why would it not be out and about? (The statistics the author has personally derived from ABS metadata should be distressing. Why is no one distressed?) Based on ABS figures, in the 30 months following the mRNA vaccine rollout more than 40,000 excess deaths have occurred in Australia against the pre-COVID five (5) year benchmark expectation. It is now widely propagated by IVISM that excess deaths have been caused only by "missed GP appointments" due to lockdown and the myopic industry focus on COVID cases. Is it possible that the cause unknown underlying 40,000+ excess deaths is the same cause unknown driving injuries some claim (rarely) from the inoculants? Because people must remain silent about the unknown cause/s the author attaches a surrogate Australian "public trust" chart in Attachment 1 for your consideration. The "trust chart" indicates that at the end of March 2023 only a fraction the Australian population were up to date and effectively "PROTECTED" from COVID by the novel, man-made inoculant drugs. If we ruminate for a moment on the unspeakable "Cause Unknown" and the population trust chart, then perhaps we might understand the insight of the many sceptical Australians into this government sponsored experiment. They are resisting ongoing coercion. Why might that be? Even in the absence of leadership, the public seem to have made a decision that is not in alignment with the business ambitions of the drug makers, the WHO, the Government, and other elite beneficiaries of the pandemic. It is accepted that COVID was widespread before Christmas 2022. In fact, the authors parents (both in their 90's) were labelled with COVID in November 2022 and the side effects of the anti-viral drugs they were given seemed worse than the disease. (The orthodox narrative premise is it's a deadly disease vs the now known real world reality.) If inoculant damage is "rare" then the Paradice family and friends have been extremely unlucky to experience such a high incidence of "rare" coincidences of illness and injury in temporal proximity following inoculation. Some see COVID inoculation as an ongoing experiment using taxpayer money to pay for high-risk drugs that are ineffective against an irrelevant virus. 4 Excess deaths and injuries 4.1 Excess deaths, cause unknown! A significantly greater number of Australians died in the 30month period to July 2023 than could have been expected to die. Of the 52,519 excess deaths in the period more than 42,712 died of a Page 15 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 "cause unknown". The author understands the Government currently acknowledges 14 of these deaths were related to COVID vaccine injury. We look forward to the Inquiry proposing a credible explanation for the underlying cause of death for the other 42,698 people. Appendix A details the statistics accumulated from the ABS mortality data releases that have supplied data back to early 2020. Appendix D graphically details excess deaths by age and sex for the most affected cohorts. While many females and males over the age of 84 died from a "cause unknown" between January 2021 and May 2023, in the month leading up to end July 2023 the excess deaths in this cohort have returned to the Syr baseline. However, both females and males between the age of 65 and 84 are the groups that currently continue to die at a remarkably higher rate than expected. (Figures 11 & 12.) 4.2 ABS changes to the baseline for comparisons, present to past - 2023 In the ABS provisional mortality statistics (release 26/05/23) the ABS made the following statement under the heading "Baseline comparison". (Baselines are based on calendar years.) "The purpose of a baseline is to provide a typical year (or combination of years) to compare the current year to. Deaths for 2023 will have two comparisons points - they will be compared to both deaths occurring in 2022 and a baseline period consisting of the average number of deaths occurring in the years of 2017-2019, 2021." While the reported death rates meandered along in the 5 years until December 2019 (2015-2019) there was effectively: - no change in Australian death rates in 2020 (virus but no vaxx), - a significant increase in 2021 (virus and vaxx), and - an extraordinary significant increase in 2022 (virus, vaxx and boosters). The effect of comparing deaths to baseline (2017-2019, 2021) for 2023 was to: - change the weighting of the baseline from 5 to 4 years, - drop off two average years (2015-2016), - replace two average years with one spike year thereby dragging up the baseline mortality rates significantly, - normalise excess deaths. The effect of comparing deaths to baseline (2022) for 2023 was to: - compare a year with highest excess deaths on record (most from cause unknown) with a year when things were expected to settle back, - make the present (2023) look much better than the past, and - indicate that excess deaths were on retreat (not true from 2015-2019). The Inquiry should consider why the ABS would change the baseline in this way. There were other options open to ensure excess deaths against baseline were more effectively assessed. One theory is that if the "cause unknown" excess deaths are normalised into the baseline then difficult questions are less likely to arise. The Inquiry should advise Australians if ABS were given Page 16 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID KrukJnquiry 2023 advice or input from the Dept, of Health or others in establishing the new baselines as the numbers arising in 2023 were compared to the past. 4.3 Rare injuries To maintain the national underlying premise (of vaccine infallibility) we must all discount people claiming "rare" injuries attributed to the novel inoculants and consider that most people apportioning blame to the novel drugs do so because of a "causal hunger" or conspiracy theory. The author continues to seek to understand "rare" as it is used in the context as reported by MSM and Governments in respect of this matter. Figure 3 depicts one of many Australian fields of sorrow. Passersby may wonder what is going on. The author invites the Inquiry to apportion meaning to the photo and keep it in mind when formulating advice. Figure 3 Field of sorrow silently informing of rare vaccine injuries at Shoalhaven Heads 4.4 COVID death misappropriation In August 2023 an explanatory model was developed by the author to test the hypothesis that "many COVID attributed mortalities are a misappropriation from other causes of death". The model compares the net expected increase in deaths for the "unusual" deficit mortality categories with actual mortalities logged to create a negative mirror image to the COVID deaths. In past Ministerial advisories this element has been one of the least explored points in the analysis. The Page 17 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 alignment of these calculations fortifies the view that COVID as a viral agent is less remarkable than flu/pneumonia. There were 1,536 flu deaths in the same period. The "missing deaths" graph in Figure 4 below indicates that "as a rule, for each COVID attributed death there is an equal and opposite (missing, predicted) death from the combined background morbidity classes of respiratory, ischaemic heart disease, and cerebrovascular issues." In the model the "missing deaths" will logically be understated as the multiplier derived from the average changed in doctor certified deaths (DCD) includes the supressing influence of the cerebrovascular, respiratory and isch. heart classifications which have generally been negative in the study period. Once the reader grasps this concept then other hypotheses and conclusions logically follow. Australian COVID Deaths vs Missing Deaths - Per week 600 •1OO 200 300 COVID Death Figure 4 COVID attributed deaths VS adjusted expected deficit deaths for Cerebrovascular, Respiratory, Isch-Heart * Missing Deaths = (Deficit deaths from cerebrov., resp., isch. heart (as a positive #) + expected increase in deaths in the cerebrov., resp., isch. heart group, based on weekly average increase in other co-morbidity groups) See - Footnote 2 Footnote 2: Mathematical model for missing deaths D = (A x (1+B)) + (-IxC) Where: A = Syear pre-covid vaccine baseline for cerebrov.+resp.+isch. heart for the week in question B = % average increase in all DCD mortality classes across the board for the week in question C = Number of actual deaths over/under 5 year baseline for cerebrov.+resp.+isch. heart for the week in question D = Missing (deficit) expected deaths for the week in question Page 18 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 4.5 Trust and confidence When indemnity protection is removed for manufacturers of the COVID inoculant drugs, only if product safety is reasonably defensible, will the manufacturers of these drugs continue to supply the COVID "vaccines" from use in the Australian market. Based on the decision by Pfizer to not supply India with these novel drugs without Government indemnity in 2021, it seems plausible that some of these novel drug products will be withdrawn from supply in Australia if indemnity is removed. The author prefers to label the novel mRNA and adenovirus vector drugs as inoculants rather than vaccines. One view is they should not be confused with, or compared to, the old tried and trusted vaccines. The author considers that to do so could be counterproductive in the long run. The Inquiry should consider if it is possible that such comparisons are fostering unreasonable negative sentiment against all vaccines? Is this happening now in Australia? What does the data indicate? 4.6 Motivations of proponents of novel COVID inoculants The author has become aware that many claiming "known" current and future safety of the novel inoculates have received research funding from the World Health Organisation and/or have material relationships (sometimes thru many distant intermediaries) with manufacturers of novel mRNA or adenovirus vector "vaccines". Personal research indicates that many promoters have little idea of the science and are motivated primarily by funding. The clip below with immunologist Professor^^^Jeads the author to believe that most Australian proponents of the novel inoculants do not know what they are talking about. The author encourages the Inquiry to consult Professor^^^Jin person in its search for the truth. https://youtu.be/ylVlyERFBdB4E (YouTube^|& Professo^^^H discuss mRNA technology.) Based on their public prognostications, the author encourages the Inquiry to examine the underlying financing arrangements of key proponents from the TGA, the Gavan Institute, the Kirby Institute, the University of Sydney, the Melbourne University, Monash University and The Australian Actuaries Institute. As more excess deaths data is revealed, less noise is heard from individuals working at the institutions listed above as the emerging scale of the problem becomes apparent. 5 Conclusions The Inquisitors should set aside all the earlier information tabled and focus on just two questions. There were ten (10) people mentioned in the story above (Section 3.2) who were injured of died soon after being jabbed with the novel drugs. There was a strong temporal connection to the "vaccine". What they believe is irrelevant. What the writer believes is irrelevant. Many people around them considered that they were vaccine injured or killed. The doctors involved appear to have ignored the temporal association and left the injured and dead to report events themselves. Without these sorts of events being logged there is no possibility of establishing the true frequency of vaccine injury and death. Distrust reigns among the associated living. Doctors become suspects. To the best of the authors' knowledge, not even one of these 10 cases were logged as an adverse event. Why would the system be designed against it? Page 19 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 The calculations (attached spreadsheet) from ABS data estimate that in the first SOmonths following rollout (Feb 2021 to 30/07/23) the most supportable number of unexpected (unexplained) Australian deaths in all cohorts was 42,712. We know the Government has now recognised 14 deaths linked to COVID vaccine injury. Is the Inquiry able to discover and reveal to the Australian people what caused the other 42,698 deaths? 6 Bibliography AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 30/03/22 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 28/04/22 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 25/05/22 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 23/06/22 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 29/07/22 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 26/08/22 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 30/09/22 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 27/10/22 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 25/11/22 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 22/12/22 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 24/02/23 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 31/03/23 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 28/04/23 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 26/05/23 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 28/06/23 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 28/07/23 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 25/08/23 AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS Provisiona mortality data release 27/10/23 Government of Western Australian Department of Health (2022) "WA Vaccine Safety Surveillance - Annual Report 2021". Page 20 of 51 231215 - PFParadice COVID Kruk lnquiry 2023 7 Appendices Page 21 of 51 7.1 Appendix A. Australian ABS mortality data On T1 October 2023, the ABS released the 2021/23 (YTD) death statistics which reported data until 30 July 2023. Tabled below are the headline numbers from the ABS metadata since January 2020 by periodic release by calendar year. (ABS releases referenced are listed in the Bibliography.) Expected total deaths for 2020 (Syr average 2015-19) 160,372 Actual total deaths for 2020 (52 weeks) 161,777 Difference in DCD deaths (Syr av) 1,405 more than expected Death's with Covid attribution (Calendar YR 2020) 854 Expected total deaths for 2021 (Syr average) 160,372 Actual total deaths for 2021 170,960 Difference in deaths (above Syr av) 10,588 = (excess deaths) Difference in deaths (above 2020) 9,683 = (excess deaths) Death's with Covid attribution (Calendar YR 2021) 1,212 2020 excess deaths LESS Covid deaths (no vaccines applied) 551 more than expected 2021 excess deaths LESS Covid deaths during vax rollout 9,378 more than expected Difference in excess deaths 2021 vs 2020 9,183 more in 2021 Australia - Excess deaths 2020/2021/2022/2023 against 5 year baseline 2015/19 800 600 400 200 32 3; 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 5152 ■200 -400 ^^—2020 over baseline ^^—2021 over baseline ^^—2022 over baseline ^^—2023 over baseline Figure 5: Weekly excess deaths Jan2020/2021/2022/2023 vs Syear benchmark background -ABS release 30 July 2023 While calendar year 2021 excess weekly total deaths increases were a significant cause for concern, since January 2022, another larger rise in "unexplained" deaths occurred. (See Figure 5 and Figure 6) From 2022 the ABS changed the comparison baseline from the Syear average to 2019 (used until the end of 2021) to a hybrid baseline, the consequences of which are discussed in Section 4.2 in the SUBMISSION above. However, when the Syear average baseline to 2019 is used for total deaths, the following numbers appear for the period January 2022 thru July 2023 and are represented in the graphs in Figure 5 and Figure 6. The numbers are remarkable in their magnitude. 22 Expected total deaths for Jan22/July23 (Syr baseline) 251,950 Actual total deaths for Jan22/July23 294,662 Difference in total deaths Jan22/July23 (above Syr averages) 42,712 = Excess deaths COVID attributed deaths Jan22/July23 12,971 Unexplained excess deaths Jan22/July23 (minimum) 29,741 Excess total deaths, vax rollout day 1 thru 30 July23 (120 wks) 52,519 COVID attributed deaths during vax rollout period (120 wks) 13,473 Excess deaths LESS COVID deaths (all attributed) 39,046 > than expected Excess deaths LESS COVID deaths (5% of DCD attributed) 51,820 > than expected The ABS indicate that people certified as having died of COVID, on average, had 3 additional chronic comorbidities and only 5% of those dying of COVID had COVID19 recorded as the sole cause of death. It is not unreasonable to assume that other COVID attributed mortalities may have been caused by co-morbidities or THE "Cause Unknown". The data indicate that since the start of the vaccine rollout (to 30 July 2023), approx. 42,519 more total deaths occurred than were expected. The non-COVID excess DCD deaths were statistically attributed to, cancer, dementia, diabetes, and other disease classes with death rates generating "overs and unders" against expected rates in different mortality classes. Data from commencement of vaccine rollout (7 February 2021 thru 30 July 2023) Attached is a spreadsheet with ABS deaths data for the 30month period from 7 February 2021 thru 30 July 2023. The ABS also report deaths broken down by some mortality classifications. "Old age" is not included as a mortality class. In July 2023 the ABS commenced reporting an additional class being "Other cardiac". It has not been introduced into this report, however preliminary and there are ongoing indications (+14% increase in the past 30 weeks against the hybrid baseline) that the data supports the hypotheses postulated in this report. The specific "death by morbidity" classifications are listed below. MORTALITY LIST A - Cancer - Cerebrovascular - Respiratory - Dementia - Diabetes - Ischaemic heart disease When the past 30months ABS data is processed (7 Feb 2021 thru 30 July 2023) by total deaths and the primary morbidity-mortality classes against the Syear baseline average the following insights emerge: A. Expected total deaths (30months) from all causes + old age 401,032 B. Actual total deaths (30months) from all causes + old age 453,551 C. Excess deaths from cancer, dementia & diabetes 19,249 -more than expected D. Excess deaths from cerebrov., resp., isch. heart (4,808) - less than expected E. Deaths attributed to COVID-19 (for 130 wks) 13,975 F. Actual deaths from COVID-19 no comorbidity (5% of E above) 699 23 Australian Weekly Vaccines & Excess Deaths 1200 1000 600 400 -200 ■400 'Excess deaths Figure 6 Weekly excess death% Jan 2020 thru July 2023 (against Syear average) -ABS release 30 July 2023 Australian Weekly Vaccines & Excess Deaths 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 -500 VaxlOOO's — Excess deaths Figure 7 Weekly COVID vaccines applied and excess deaths Jan 2021 thru July 2023 (against Syear average) -ABS Data from the 2021 COVID "attributed" deaths resurgence (5 July 2021) thru 30 July 2023 Following Australia's isolation, COVID attributed deaths began appearing in the weekly data from the report dated EOW 11 July 2021. The data for the following 107week period until end July 2023 revealed the following two numbers. 24 Deaths attributed to COVID-19 (for 107weeks) 13,971 Excess deaths from cerebrovasc., resp., influenza, isch. heart (4,808) less than expected In other words, in the 107week period beginning 05/07/21 a partial inverse pattern to COVID deaths (negative actual against expected) emerges for the combined morbidity-mortality classifications of: MORTALITY LIST B (Subset of LIST A) - Cerebrovascular - Respiratory - Ischaemic heart disease In the same "107week" time frame, deaths attributed to the morbidity-mortality classifications of cancer, dementia, and diabetes, increased by 16,698 people. So, what could it all mean? The Key Numbers The key takeaway numbers from the Australian deaths ABS metadata to 30/07/23 are: - 52,519 excess deaths were reported from vax. rollout day-1 thru 30 July 2023 (Ref Figure 6), - There were13,975COVID attributed deaths from vax. rollout day-1 thru 30 July 2023, - There were38,544excess deaths after deducting all those attributed to COVID-19, - There were51,820excess deaths after deducting NET1 COVID-19 deaths of those dying without co-contributing comorbidities (Figure 8), - There were (4,414) LESS deaths from cerebrovascular, respiratory, and ischaemic heart from 5 July 2021 thru 30 July 2023 (a negative inverse to COVID accounting directly for approx. 32% of COVID appropriated deaths however if mortality is adjusted to account for the missing anticipated increases in these groups, plus the observed deficit, a mirror image to the COVID attributed deaths is revealed - see Figure 9), - Deducting deaths of those dying with contributory co-morbidity then far fewer COVID attributed deaths could arguably be considered to have been from COVID as the primary cause from 20 September 2021 thru 30 July 2023, - There were 19,249 more deaths than expected from 5 July 2021 thru 30 July 2023 from cancer, dementia & diabetes, and - There were 21,734 more deaths than expected from 5 July 2021 thru 30 July 2023 from the "cause unknown", old age or causes other than the primary ABS mortality classifications discussed above. 25 Extrapolated "Cause Unknown" Deaths (weekly) after Deducting NET COVID deaths 800 400 "S i 5 w 300 Q 200 100 ■100 Date (vaccine rollout commenced WC 7/2/21 Covid deaths EXCESS Less COVID NET CauseUnknown Deaths Figure 8 Extrapolated NET ""Cause Unknown"" deaths * from rollout commencement 7 February 2021 to 30 July 2023 * NET "Cause Unknown" deaths = (Total excess deaths) MINUS (NET COVID attributed )deaths ** * NET COVID attributed deaths = (Total COVID Attributed deaths) PLUS (M_LISTB Attributed ** deficit deaths) Australian COVID Deaths vs Missing Deaths - Per week 1OO Missing Deaths Figure 9 COVID attributed deaths IZS adjusted expected deficit deaths for Cerebrovascular, Respiratory, Isch-Heart * Missing Deaths = SYR baseline cerebrov., resp., isch. heart group + anticipated increase in deaths in the C.R.I group (based on weekly average increase in all morbidity groups) + (Deficit deaths from cerebrov., resp., isch. heart (as a positive #)) See - Footnote 3 26 Footnote 3: Mathematical model for missing deaths D = (Ax(l+B)) + (-lxC) Where: A = 5year pre-covid vaccine baseline for cerebrov.+resp.+isch. heart for the week in question B = % average increase in all DCD mortality classes across the board for the week in question C = Number of actual deaths over/under 5 year baseline for cerebrov.+resp.+isch. heart for the week in question D = Missing (deficit) expected deaths for the week in question T1 7.2 Appendix B. The "Cause Unknown" and Virus Activity Hypotheses Hypotheses, reasonably postulated from the ABS numbers for Australia (and that require testing by examination of the microdata) are: - The "Cause Unknown" shortened the lives of (killed) at least 38,544 and as many as 52,519 Australians since the start of the "vaccine" rollout (130 weeks), - 44,512 is calculated to be the most likely estimate of Australian people in all cohorts who had their lives shortened by THE "Cause Unknown" in the 130 weeks to 30 July 2023. (The ratio of total excess deaths is 1 excess death per 1,465 inoculants applied. Remarkably this ratio has also been recorded for the UK and the USA.) - Ongoing "Cause Unknown" intervention continues to shorten the lives of people across most age groups, - 95% of deaths attributed to COVID had co-contributing comorbidities (ABS comorbidity rates), - Attributed COVID deaths can be logically calculated to be lower than official claims, - Older patients testing positive for COVID were in many cases "written off" and treated with "end-of-life" programs or euthanasia type interventions (or had lifesaving interventions withheld) that contributed to their demise, - Novel COVID "vaccines" don't stop viral spread or infection (the antithesis of initial Government coercion declaring "a pandemic of the unvaccinated"), and, - Temporal regression modelling of the extra 9,834 cancer deaths indicates a correlation between mRNA "vaccine" application and increased cancer deaths (+9% and climbing) which could indicate a possible causal relationship. The relationship is 30 deaths per Im doses lagged 120days. (The association since the commencement of the experiment is 154 extra cancer deaths per Im doses. However, on the basis that 21m people were inoculated with an average of 3 doses of "vaccine" then the direct correlation is an extra 462 cancer deaths per Im people given the 3dose course of COVID drug treatment.) 28 7.3 Appendix C. The Logical COVID Conclusions If the hypotheses logically formulated on the metadata are supported by the microdata (unavailable to-date for independent examination), then the following conclusions might reasonably be drawn from the Australian COVID experience. - The Government unreasonably overstated the danger of the COVID virus (any variant). - With wilful ignorance and in the face of evolving facts, the Government, and mainstream media unreasonably terrified and coerced the nation into accepting inoculation with the novel vaccines. - Many older Australians testing positive for COVID were largely "written off" and left to die from what now appears to have been an unremarkable and treatable illness. (This boosted the statistics for the COVID death rates.) - A "Cause Unknown" shortened the lives of (and continues to shorten the lives of) many vulnerable and healthy Australians. (Refer Figure 8) - Statistically, the virus as a sole agent in shorten the lives of people who died with COVID attribution is questionable. - The novel COVID "vaccines" are implicated in significantly increased rates of cancer. Therefore, if these conclusions are eventually supported by the microdata, then the benefits will be seen to not outweigh the costs in applying these drugs (the misnamed novel COVID "vaccines") to any cohort of the Australian population. If the conclusions are eventually supported by the microdata could the Inquiry establish who will take responsibility for this awful human experiment? Some of the people in key positions who should be invited to take responsibility for the consequences of the Australian COVID management response are: - The 2021 Prime Minister Morrison (lost Govt.) - The 2021 Federal Minister for Health Hunt (Resigned) - The 2021 Secretary for Health Professor Murphy (Retired) - The 2021 Chief Medical Officer of Australia Professor Kelly - The 2021 Head of theTGA Adj. Professor Skerritt (Retired) - The 2021 Head of ATAGI Assoc. Professor Crawford - The 2021 NSW Minister for Health Hazzard (Retired) - The 2021 NSW Chief Medical Officer Dr Chant - The 2021 Victorian Minister for Health Andrew - The 2021 Victorian Chief Health Officer Professor Sutton (Resigned) 29 1A Appendix D: Graphs of Australian excess death rates by key affected age groupings January 2020 thru July 2023 All Persons 40% dj cn CO co (D ■o xp 0% ~ _0/ 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 :5 29 m 3^ 35 19 3 45 47 49 51 Calendar week ^—Baseline 5 year ^—2020 ^—2021 ^—2022 ^—2023 Figure 10: Australian excess deaths%. All persons. January 2020 thru July 2023 Persons 65-74 50% 40% d) GO co _Q CO dj ■o xp 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 '31 33 3X 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 -20% Calendar week Baseline 5 year 2020 2021 2022 ^—2023 Figure 11: Australian excess deaths%. Persons 65-74. January 2020 thru July 2023 30 Persons 75-84 60% 40% dj tn CO _Q CO dj ■o xp 3' .9 43 45 47 49 51 Calendar week ^—Baseline 5 year ^—2020 ^—2021 — 2022 ^—2023 Figure 12: Australian excess deaths%. Persons 75-84. January 2020 thru July 2023 Persons over 84 40% dj tn CO _Q CO dj ■o xp 45 47 49 51 Calendar week ^—Baseline 5 year ^—2020 ^—2021 — 2022 ^—2023 Figure 13: Australian excess deaths%. Persons over 84. January 2020 thru July 2023 31 All Males 50% 40% OJ 30% OJ 20% 10% OJ 0% 9 11 13’15 17 19 21 31 3i 43 45 47 49 51 -10% -20% Calendar week Baseline 5 year 2020 2021 2022 2023 Figure 14: Australian excess deaths%. All Males. January 2020 thru July 2023 Males 65-74 50% 40% dj to co -O 20% cu dj ■o xp 127 45 47 -20% Calendar week ^—Baseline 5 year ^—2020 ^—2021 ^—2022 ^—2023 Figure 15: Australian excess deaths%. Males 65-74. January 2020 thru July 2023 32 Males 75 -84 10% 40% 0J GO cu _Q cu CD ■O 10% xp o\ 31 331 37V39 Calendar week ^—Baseline 5 year ^—2020 ^—2021 2022 ^—2023 Figure 16: Australian excess deaths%. Males 74-84. January 2020 thru July 2023 Males over 84 80% 60% OJ cn ra n 40% cn £ 20% ra 5 in A.istra ia. ana t-'- conrcrns mot I.OV ':-in v.ironsj This correspondence has bean rufeitw to me d>. Mim-,tcr Aged Ca-e, win uurttalu rcsuotnibilily 'ir th rruHt’r. I appreciate the time Mr Paradice has taken in writing to you- -ft cr .a were ci □v.s rna .y ccpriWLd fo If >< and ’rT.mrFgi 'mH an lb-ct re that they meet hir^ "a.ichfos fo- salwv, r; ahly. nd "du,icy El ncul t- ak He-c J-Iev dud .uloiniri: u-’ ah.I<1 Ifo’ mfofo p- Hies c+ the C'JVIh r< vaednes and Intensive post-market mr^irnmc of Hundren'. H mil ons ut H .ys wandWMe 'MS furll'Fr < fore rer Hip s.-tr-ty of x-ere vcccirts Global real war Id re-H CW.1-19 varenes continue! to preaae reasSu'-fLc abuut ti-ul- te-m i-ahdy, Wccinw. (ar IcaC tu r. ertrerefo-am nxfoncF . Howpw. in the ov£rwl-.:lre':n maprity ; fre w .re.-'-’s th-.t errer npre vnrr natio-’ are ret caused oy the vnccree in large pup.; al'ctns here ere ceople wth undenting diseases wre ri-ay J e fnun !reu- diseases shortly after the vaccine is administered. In such cases the II nk between the vaccine and forth is Luir i Ji-ifo' b. i- u 'ir;u -.l. .-ruv^Hr, r ■ n-itfor>rei forth-, .inn coatbs nr«.>. i n। Ifo vaccinej the TCA uses date from reports of death fa sweral ways. Thc-TCA ulasc-ly reviewsall afoi'reuforU altfi COVID tQ -a;: i .rMlire where □ fatal tutLUifo w-as ii-pcr.td Inr. Ti-w i- ricugrrefo ww. wfothpr rhe tcg ca wu.ti.ir I"H' r -U--1 d fort I rrprr'urt w; a team nr'ifonE dolors ana rerscs {TnaT|, reru for fop slrenp+n tithe folfol ce fo- : ’.re between vareire. ui -d 11ir >_L:n.w ui । fort ’ I he Tejl11 T ic Tej-r •ndv icqucrt mere'-for-rfo'cm Tut h-jHlth rtituritifo, independent panels of specialist stottors and ceroners. i Jl' JT <. H L-rt J •-!. !r ■ 38 2 l> riuu '.lun .c 'Pvit’wrj, of the TGfl Lies stat stc S3tet»J corwtr^ ’ hi-, indudis a I rcpada .ncludinp d csr •A-tth t^v uu'. pt s-.. H ' reruga .^d feve-se eftcets d COVID-19 wettaej are inctaded In the approved Product linfcmatton (Pi) documents, used by vnu.ini' .nnrun ■.tratep and othe' health professionals Sir co t°c bcgii ■itud i/ ’.re vaenne rnilout ui-.' ■irde- 6h m Ilion doses of CGV1D-13 vaccines have Poor £ vi-i in A.Atrril a 'he I LA has identihed 1J repcjib, whnn- Ifm : au,«- cf ifenth wrii linked to vaccination. hi ddiiUitr . theTCA has token 30 regulatory actions to include new safety informatfon in the Pl documentrforCOVlO-lS Ail outccire- are pubastc-d ip Hu- iCiAS t tlVir-19 vaccine satety report ava- aelc at www.t- a..-ov a j tuvid 19 vricunt'-.afe^-monitorM,, ard Sfiortinfi I । -r -nr-o ,ri!-T,^rrf ’.V -'Tach-: s^gere: fret ar di-iem'' < 1 Ji ?-(- ton'd-il- an.w, 2022 iTatm ttot thm- wi t.: 2,(34 l-td to'TO feiihs ir 207: were pecpla diet: a tn cr iron (toVIJ to rnp hep ir! g-es on to wphir rtor tor- m.ijnrto (?.-".H nr-.Ttnj to thato 2,(3“ d^rtfb Wi-re 1; te drecHy tc COVID .3' b -I'l.ailv, IV' Pa'adicu tiiL"iti'jri‘> 148,343 astu, dra'.ns f.i- .’to J, ।•-we,the ABS reptot Prcvr, cr,t Mentality to.toto: >■ wb 1 h is ■(,. mH on rei* a* ww* ,ib<. >ov □□ statFlkeJn'dlHi, dy-. -di-toi.iruw nna -mivt-il I .tate tout lb urt wir j49/8b doctor ce-M ed deaths k 2021 The- age stancaidisad cestb r,’1 fit 2(1 ’] w,i' 431 p«r 100,000 people. While higher than 2020, this was lower than the average for 2015-19 (453). I nt- ofu toil ■. 1 r .:t while tto’- tothtoticru ccr prpvidaan indication of where higher than -tfp.-rtrd ri-iTal ty may nave r.-ciirrec1 it net a- ct- c a Kt ma’i ot to-rv, mi toil'ty Using the number of deaths from the previous five years, as the predictor for the espected number ot dearm duei -i-.-'t tew- nto accrtoni < h-rpes in pop ihiIto '■■ re and ai?e stiuctjr-, of that poputatton. The analysis also does not include coroner-referred deaths, so any rhr.ngr- ir nnt-pm;. nt carene' rerc-ral ccu-d effect counts ot eketo- ce-1ihec Hnnth-, Theremre mortalit1,' data Imm tm- AUS .aririT be u'.r-d tu toto.m 're' -wfetv of a vxcinc or toternuik the rU uf death 'Ad'. :< (Term I van. 'ih'. 39 3 In Australia, information on deaths from COVIC-19 Is collected through disease surveillance systems, such as the National interoperable Notifiable Disease*Surveillance System, and civil registration systems, such as the ABS COVID-19 mortality data. ABS data 1$ not directly comparable with data sourced from health surveillance systems, which are designed to release information rapidly on both Infections and mortality. The TGA continues to monitor the safety of COVID-19 vaccinations. The current evidence demonstrates that the benefits of the COVID-19 vaccines available In Australia continue to qverwhel m I ngly ou tweigh the rls ks. Thank you for writing on this matter. 40 8.3 Attachment 3: Dept, of Health letter re COVID vaccine adverse events 23 May 2022 Australian Government Department of Health Acting Deputy Secretary Peter Paractice Dear Mr Paradice, Australian vaccine adverse event reporting, compensation claims and ABS excess moitalitv statistics Thank you for your correspondence dated 30 March 2022, which was forwarded to me as it relates to excess deaths, I note that you have expressed concern for, and sought assistance with LUTderstanding, 2020-21 Australian Death Data published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). We have been working with the ABS to understand then mortality' reports, and the processes by which they have been compiled. We are also working with the ABS mortalit’.- data to integrate and further analyse deaths over the COVID-19 period, including understanding the range of potential contributors to mortality from specific causes. We are currently developing and validating analysis methodologv before we can produce findings that can be shared more widely. Excess mortality as an epidemiological concept, is defined as the difference between the observed and expected number of deaths in a specified time-period. Excess mortality calculations are used to observe whether mortality rates have deviated from trends seen in preceding years. In particular, this can be used to assess if deaths from specific cattses (e g. C0VID-19), conditions or other circumstances (such as environmental factors) have caused annual mortality rates to go beyond expected levels. It is important to note that excess mortality figures can be calculated in many ways, arid the ABS have their' own specific methods. Dre ABS publishes two regular reports covering excess deaths in Australia: Ptwna: ansa: - ■mw.HBaltn.gcv.ai 41 -2­ 1. The first report., named' Provisional Mortality Statistics', appears to be the source of the figures you analysed. Tlus publication utilises preliminary counts of doctor certified deaths by date of occunence to calculate average mortality rates over a specified time-period. 2. The second report, named 'Measuring Australia's excess mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic', is based on the Serfling model. This model takes into account seasonality and trends over the pas t three years,, and consequently presents contrasting .figures to the Provisional Mortality Statistics report. I encourage you to analyse both reports to obtain, a more complete understanding of excess mortality in Australia. The ABS are currently your best point of contact to describe how data has been used to model excess deaths, as well as how to interpret deaths that are excess to their expected ranges. The ABS website provides some details of methodologies used (e.g. the Serfling model, seasonal averaging), or alternatively specific enquiries can be sent to | Unfortunately, we are unable to provide the unit record death data you requested, as this data can only be compiled through data linkage from various Commonwealth and state-based datasets which we do not have access to. We are continuously working to ensure relevant aggregate death statistics and research outputs are made accessible to the public. Thank you once again for your interest in this data. Yours sincerely 23 May 2022 42 8.4 Attachment 4: Dept, of Health TGA advice re adverse events 24 December 2021 AmtraliaiH.ou'rmik'n! Ikpanmwit of llvuhh Depth SevteUM '/• i1..,- I' .1 ill ■"b :I ?, ? i. • tlo- '•/ A M,:!' M- r< I t> * V,,!.'..', ■ ’A .1,' I ■ 'th-m > H i A D A .,1 u ,< i, >’■ I.pn', '.'J-u 1D- K.'d t.' O'. ’ hl bip.'ua ■ d'- V.trup.ii is . h , i ,.i< S'"C h> bwi: «in<- i< :,H1 .h I," 'H'» I • - 'f n ;■>>>■<. (h tqth" I a • ,, u-ntp 11 . .ub I th....I .lu-rs (1 >, J •,.( r, i ,1! ... . ■ I tj'PM vh -lui id... ■ h,.,-di - .‘i b,. . . ."i . -i .uh i ....i-m*. hull, n, >JP', itiiK. M.itr,1 < ,< tin ■*. • l-t. h.,.'. I>.. h , ii'i, a. .-.t -.1 ,h • ..Hi t dn'dX D:1' ... in- s 'b.i! u-.r !| - b '.I' i.-'1. > -u- .-I ' .i, - .........................I ,1 u .uh, I hh'ifim.ih'l’. t'-, i- p r. a . ...... : । .< '■•hei f ■■ at. t.i .-nAin » li. .t>" '' >‘h -i.-i, ,-D n ;, u-. \, ui -. n ■-h, i >• 'b, . ,f, t 'nA He tH.iiu ".U'.b Hh. t; i.U’miu H- in r " I .dtp, H A^hh.-,.’ n:'..:, « mb1 •'-.n’l.' h. .dt!< I. .it-• '..pt-i I ..p, ,, P., u t-., m , il..-.., it-p in. ;M' 0 I ul th,". >>'. •- h V. >■ du H- I Hulu ■». . iLr. th . 1”. - it ID .r'l atld, i l< ft t 'll', .1 IV'I-. < •,• f .i!l, : < ' I; ' .■ > s a> , t t.t!I........ V. V. In „ (hi (> ■ - m •.. un .t.h , < if .Is th,: I ax tie ' l 'p. i-l. ,.l (•> If I '»-‘u -n . > I al r , ■ -nl ,bt;■ that v..' .it. iv. i-i>. ne. a •. < -■ jiUt;i< .x pt a I:- m ■ . tlive- .■. ja.i u v. hv h !• J--f h v. ‘ i- . । is -t ■ I h. •..mH , i- ■> r I . I s ,. ■ ■ ivh.is, ,.H pH1* 43 -2- ln many cases they report conditions that have occurred following vaccination regardless of whether they suspect it was caused by vaccination. These reports are initially made to their state or territory health department, who then report them to the TGA. With this in mind, I agree with you that an extrapolation to 4.5 million unreported adverse events is just not possible. As you point out, this hypothesis is not supported by evidence of our health systems being overcome by requirements to treat that volume of vaccine injuries. The TGA comprehensively evaluated each of the provisionally registered COVID-19 vaccines before approval. No element of the evaluation is rushed, and no data are overlooked. It is a similar process to that undertaken by other major regulators, including the European Medicines Agency and Health Canada. TGA staff with expertise in medicine, biostatistics and epidemiology undertake analysis of adverse event report data to detect signals for possible safety' concerns. Investigations of these safety' signals aim to distinguish between coincidental events and side effects that may be caused by the vaccines. When these investigations confirm a safety' issue, we take prompt action to address the issue and provide information to the public. To date no international regulator has identified any association between Vaxzevria and heart disease and it is not included in the Product Information which contains the most update to date safety information for a medicinal product. The TGA has been publishing a weekly COVID-19 vaccine safety' report for over 10 months. Each report contains clear, accurate and up-to-date information about die TGA's safety monitoring activities, including details of its scientific and evidence­ based evaluations of serious adverse events and deaths reported for COVID-19 vaccines. The reports are available on our website at: www.tga.gov.au/periodic/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-safety-report . 1 hope the above information helps to reassure you that the TGA's safety monitoring of COVID-19 vaccines is effectively protecting the Australian public. Yours sincerely Health Products Regulation Group 24 December 2021 CC Member for Wagga Wagga 44 8.5 Attachment 5: Dept, of Health letter re COVID vaccine justification 13 October 2021 Australian Gmcrriinent Department uf Health Ref No. MC21-032660 Mr Peter Para dice Dear Mr Paradice I refer to your correspondence of 16 September 2021 to the Deputy Prime Minister, ■ 'e -: " : ' :e • - 5 A.,st-al a’: -esc: - se r :■ erne-5 “ rias of SC V ~ As the Department of Health is responsible for Australia's COVID-19 health response, your letter has been referred to the Minister for Health and Aged Care, the Hon^^^^^ MP' The Minister has asked me to reply. Evidence regarding variants is being closely monitored by experts, such as Communicable Diseases Network Australia, Communicable Diseases Genomics Network, and the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee (AHPPC) to inform our public health response and protect the Australian population. Australia's goal, as recommended by AHPPC, was suppression of COVID-19 with no community transmission. This strategy recognised that outbreaks continued to remain a risk. Maintaining that goal requires active case find Ing and contact tracing, targeted testing □f the affected population, public health and social measures and personal measures. Elimination was never a goal of Australia's COVID-19 pandemic response. In the absence of high amounts of immunity in the population both in Australia and globally, elimination is not a realistic short term goal, in the short term when there are outbreaks of the virus as vaccination coverage is going up, it is still important to suppress transmission of the virus where possible. In the longer term, elimination at a global level will only be feasible if there is high vaccination coverage across a majority of countries, in reality it might take a few rounds of booster shots to get there but if not the more likely scenario remains that the virus is likely to stay around for some time. SARS-CoV-2 remains a Listed Human Disease under the Biosecurity Act 2015 and as vaccination coverage increases the use of public health measures in lieu of using lockdown will still be needed as outlined in the National Plan to Transition Australia's National COVID Response (National Plan} informed by the Doherty modelling. GPQ Box 9848 CANBERRA ACT 2601 Telephone: | 45 2 The National Plan provides a graduated pathway to transition Australia's COVID-19 response from its current pre-vaccination settings focused on continued suppression of community transmission, to post-vaccination settings focused on prevention of serious illness and fatalities, whereby the public health management of COVID-19 is consistent with other infectious diseases. The safety of the Australian population has always been the highest priority of the Government. For this reason, decisions regarding COVID-19 vaccines have been guided by the expert medical advice of the AustralianTechnical Advisory Group on Immunisation. The goal is to protect all people in Australia from the harm caused by COVID-19 infection, through preventing serious illness and death, and where possible, disease transmission. The Pfizer, AstraZeneca (Vaxzevria) and Modema vaccines have all been proven through approval and safety monitoring processes to be very effective at reducing severe illness, hospitalisation, and death. In addition, to better support Australians though the COVID-19 vaccination process, the Government is developing the COVID-19 Vaccine Claims Scheme (the Scheme). On 28 August 2021, the Minister announced further details of the Scheme, which will provide Australians with an alternative, administrative option to seek compensation, rather than through a complex and costly court process. The Scheme will cover the costs of injuries $5,000 and above due to a proven adverse reaction to a COVID-19 vaccine or its administration. Furthermore, as part of the Government's Nst cr al Z desre u. 1Ist:^ •" ? • CC V D--? serosurveillance is one of the key surveillance approaches adopted to inform understanding of population level immunity to SARS-CoV-2. To date, seroprevalence surveys have been undertaken by the Australian Partnership for Preparedness Research on Infectious Disease Emergencies and led by the National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance in coIlla boration with the Kirby Institute. The Department of Health is considering future national level serosurvey requirements and appropriate timing. The role of future national serosurveys in understanding population level immunity will be an important surveillance tool, including with regarding to measuring vaccination coverage, to guide public health measures. I wish to assure you that the Australian, state and territory governments are working together to coordinate an evidence-based response to COVID-19, based on the latest medical advice. Together these actions have placed us in a good position globally. Thank you for writing on this matter. Yours sincerely Director Office of Health Protection and Response 13 October 2021 46 8.6 Attachment 6: Sydney Morning Herald article 22 September, 2022 THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD THURSDAY. SEPTEMBER 22. 2022 News COVID COMPLICATIONS Deaths hit highest number in 40 years Dana Daniel Senate inquiry into long COVID, likely to have been hastened by the increase in deaths this year, she Federal health reporter said he was “very concerned” about The alarm has been sounded about higher-than-normal deaths in the pandemic and that more research 46,200 pandemic. The remaining 2500 people died from other causes. While it is un­ said, was that vulnerable people who were shielded from influenza or RSV in the winters of 2020 and The number of deaths recorded COVID-19’s hidden impact as new was needed to ascertain why. in the March quarter of 2022 clear what, if any role COVID-19 2021 due to COVTD-19 restrictions data shows that the highest num­ While the inquiry was focused may have played, a higher-than- had succumbed to these respirat­ ber of people have died in the on long COVID, he said, “there is a usual number of deaths from stro­ ory illnesses. March quarter of 2022 than in any of the past 41 years. concern that COVID itself in­ creases inflammatory responses, 36,100 kes, heart disease, dementia and diabetes makes the working group Assistant Health Minister Ged Kearney yesterday announced Australian Bureau of Statistics predisposes people to stroke and The number of deaths recorded suspect that it could be a factor. $6.3 million in funding for research cardiovascular disease”. in the March quarter of 2021 “There are people who have had led by Monash University to evalu­ population data published yester­ day shows an 18 per cent increase “The other question is: are there COVID and recovered, but it’s ate the immune response in chil­ in deaths in the quarter compared risk factors, is there anything that Mortality Working Group, said weakened their immune system dren and high-risk populations, in­ with the same period a year earlier, can be done to modify the risk?” about 6000 more people died in the [and] they’ve subsequently had a cluding adults with chrome condi­ rising from 36,100 to 46,200 Freelander said. March quarter than could be ex­ heart attack or stroke that might tions, to COVID-19. The inquiry will collate data plained by the ageing population. not necessarily be directly linked The project aims to improve the deaths. from scientific experts to gain in­ Half of these people died from back to their COVID episode,” Cut­ care and outcomes for children It is the first time that more than sights into how COVID-19 affects COVID-19, she said, with a further ter said. and people with chronic diseases, 40,000 deaths were recorded over including tailored treatments and health after the initial infection. 500 dying “with COVID”, their “Having COVID increases your four consecutive quarters. vaccination schedules appropriate Karen Cutter, spokeswoman for deaths from causes such as cancer, risk of these sorts of things.” South-western Sydney Labor MP Another possible reason for the to children and high-risk groups. the Actuaries Institute COVID-19 circulatory diseases and dementia Dr Mike Freelander, Chair of the 8.7 Attachment 7: Covering letter to the P.F. Paradice submission to the CofA COVID Inquiry. 15 December 2023 Chair CofA COVID-19 Response Inquiry Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet Parliament House CANBERRA ACT Dear Re: Submission to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry (AKA Restoring Trust in Public Health Inquiry) Please find attached a submission to the Kruk COVID Inquiry. This submission seeks to support the Inquiry in the mission to restore trust in public health following the government performance/s in response to the COVID-19 challenge. It is my sincere hope that the "Prime Ministers team" will successfully restore the trust of a sceptical public in the Australian institutions of public health, doctors, and the broader medical profession. My understanding is that the people picked on the Prime Ministers panel were supportive, in fact complicit, in formulating and prosecuting the orthodox COVID response. These chosen people have continued to support novel inoculations for COVID beyond a point where others, without insider history, may have suspended the intervention and discontinued defending the indefensible. Appendices and attachments to this submission are "data focused" and were generated using the ABS mortality data releases up until T1 October 2023 to detail and analyse Australian mortality statistics since the beginning of the COVID event. There is no discussion herein of "The Science". I urge the Inquiry to recommend that the Commonwealth Government release the unadulterated micro-data to test (and hopefully refute) the fearsome hypotheses postulated in this submission. The data examined in this submission are solid grounds to advise the Government of Australia to follow the lead of the Swiss authorities in suspending the ongoing COVID inoculation program. My perception is that many Australians have subdued expectations of this Inquiry. It seems unlikely Australians will lower their reasonable barriers of distrust until the unbridled truth is revealed. Findings of the Inquiry, if perceived to be as illogical as the ongoing inoculation program, could perpetuate or exacerbate the well-founded distrust (scepticism) generated by government in the COVID years. There are powerful forces at work that I do not understand. I see self-censorship instead of open debate. I see "gaslighting" of the injured and supporters of the dead. I see apparent errors evincing incongruous denialist behaviour in a bureaucracy that simply doesn't make sense. I see "sacred text" in narratives that are unassailed by clear logic. I hear a reputable UK research Professor of Immunology warning that ongoing boosting with COVID shots can "down-regulate" the immune system. I read a Yale research pre-print describing Post-Vaccine Syndrome which is a euphemism to allow mainstream institutions to consider publishing the unthinkable. So, in closing, and in line with the narrative, I urge the Inquirers to "stay safe", trust in Big Pharma, and what-ever-else, stay up to date with your personal booster shots! In the annals of Australian history, those who effectively sort this mess out will be remembered as the heroines of our age. Good luck. Yours sincerely, Peter Paradice 49 8.8 Attachment 8: Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry TOR Scope The Inquiry will review the Commonwealth Government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic and make recommendations to improve response measures in the event of future pandemics. It will consider opportunities for systems to more effectively anticipate, adapt and respond to pandemics in areas of Commonwealth Government responsibility. The Inquiry will adopt a whole-of-government view in recognition of the wide-ranging impacts of COVID-19 across portfolios and the community. Specific areas of review may include, but are not limited to: • Governance including the role of the Commonwealth Government, responsibilities of state and territory governments, national governance mechanisms (such as National Cabinet, the National Coordination Mechanism and the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee) and advisory bodies supporting responses to COVID-19. • Key health response measures (for example across COVID-19 vaccinations and treatments, key medical supplies such as personal protective equipment, quarantine facilities, and public health messaging). • Broader health supports for people impacted by COVID-19 and/or lockdowns (for example mental health and suicide prevention supports, and access to screening and other preventive health measures). • International policies to support Australians at home and abroad (including with regard to international border closures, and securing vaccine supply deals with international partners for domestic use in Australia). • Support for industry and businesses (for example responding to supply chain and transport issues, addressing labour shortages, and support for specific industries). • Financial support for individuals (including income support payments). • Community supports (across early childhood education and care, higher education, housing and homelessness measures, family and domestic violence measures in areas of Commonwealth Government responsibility). • Mechanisms to better target future responses to the needs of particular populations (including across genders, age groups, socio-economic status, geographic location, people with disability, First Nations peoples and communities and people from culturally and linguistically diverse communities). The Inquiry will consider the findings of previous relevant inquiries and reviews and identify knowledge gaps for further investigation. It will also consider the global experience and lessons learnt from other countries in order to improve response measures in the event of future global pandemics. The following areas are not in scope for the Inquiry: 50 • Actions taken unilaterally by state and territory governments. • International programs and activities assisting foreign countries. Independent Panel The Prime Inquiry has appointed an Independent Panel of three eminent people to conduct the Inquiry. The Independent Panel will consult with relevant experts and people with a diverse range of backgrounds and lived experience. Taskforce A Taskforce within the Department of the Prime Inquiry and Cabinet will support the Independent Panel. Public consultation Public consultation will be completed during the Inquiry on the substance of the issues outlined in the Terms of Reference. The Independent Panel may invite and publish submissions and seek information from any persons or bodies. Consultation will take place across Australia with: • Key community and other stakeholders reflecting a diversity of backgrounds • Experts • Commonwealth Government and state and territory government agencies • Members of the public Final Report The Independent Panel will deliver a Final Report to Government including recommendations to the Commonwealth Government to improve Australia’s preparedness for future pandemics by the end of September 2024. 51 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0093 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0095 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0095.pdf Submission to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry Dear COVID-19 Response Inquiry Panel, I am writing to submit my insights as a General Practitioner based in Melbourne, actively engaged on the frontline during the early stages (and ongoing) COVID-19 pandemic. I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the inquiry and share my firsthand experiences to aid in the improvement of Australia's preparedness for future pandemics. Introduction: I am a GP with a commitment to delivering quality care and ensuring the safety of both patients and practice staff. My involvement in the day-to-day challenges posed by the pandemic has provided me with a distinctive perspective on various frontline issues, ranging from the provision of care to COVID-19 patients to the continuity of care for all other patients and active participation in the vaccination process. Key reflections: 1. Lack of Consistency in Clinical Advice The absence of a centrally governed Centre for Disease Control in Australia has notably resulted in challenges related to the consistency of clinical advice, largely due to the decentralised nature of decision-making across states and territories. This decentralised model has introduced complexities in offering unified and streamlined guidance, impacting healthcare staff and patients alike. From a practical standpoint, the fragmentation in decision-making has led to variations in public health measures, testing and isolation protocols and treatment recommendations, creating confusion among both healthcare professionals and the public. In addressing these challenges, the proposal for establishing an Australian Centre for Disease Control emerges as not only commendable but also imperative. A centrally governed CDC would provide a unified framework for decision-making, fostering consistency in clinical advice, public health strategies, and emergency responses. This centralised approach would significantly enhance the coordination and efficiency of information dissemination, ensuring that healthcare providers, public health agencies, and the general public receive clear evidence-based guidance promptly. From a clinical perspective, having a centralised body dedicated to disease control would streamline data collection, analysis, and dissemination, allowing for real-time adjustments in response strategies. This not only contributes to a more agile and effective public health system but also instils confidence in healthcare professionals and the public by presenting a coherent and coordinated front in the face of health crises. The proposed Australian Centre for Disease Control is a proactive step towards fortifying the nation's resilience in managing health emergencies, embodying a commitment to evidence-based, consistent and well-coordinated healthcare practices. 2. Balancing Act within General Practice: Navigating the Dual Challenge of Chronic Care and Respiratory Symptoms in the Era of COVID-19 Balancing the care of patients with chronic health conditions alongside the management of individuals presenting with respiratory symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 presented a significant challenge in general practice. The need to provide ongoing care for those with chronic illnesses requires meticulous attention to their specific health needs, treatment plans, and regular check-ups. Simultaneously, the identification and appropriate management of potential COVID-19 cases demand a different set of precautions, including isolation measures, testing, and referral for further assessment. This dual responsibility not only strains the resources and logistics of the practice but also requires constant adaptation to evolving guidelines and protocols. The challenge lies in mitigating the risks of potential COVID-19 transmission within the practice environment while ensuring that the continuity of care for patients with chronic conditions remains uninterrupted. This delicate balance demands a nuanced and dynamic approach, emphasising the importance of robust infection control measures and clear communication to provide comprehensive and safe healthcare services to all patients. 3. Operational Challenges: Ensuring Effective Communication and Comprehensive Care in General Practice One of the formidable challenges encountered on the frontline involves the intricate task of disseminating crucial COVID-19 related decisions within primary care. This challenge is particularly pronounced when managing patients with respiratory symptoms. Navigating this delicate balance demands a multifaceted approach to healthcare delivery. It encompasses not only the imperative to prevent Emergency Departments from being inundated by individuals with severe injuries and diseases but also the preservation of general practices for routine functions. This encompasses a broad spectrum of services, ranging from chronic disease management, acute injury care, cancer treatment, pregnancy care, and mental health support to immunisations and various screening procedures - while dealing with a pandemic. 4. Navigating Challenges: Critical Evaluation of GP Respiratory Clinics One significant area of concern revolves around the hasty establishment of GP respiratory clinics by the COVID- 19 Primary Care Response team of the Australian Government Department of Health. While these clinics were ostensibly created to address the escalating respiratory challenges posed by the virus, my on-the-ground experience reveals glaring inadequacies in their setup and functionality. The shortcomings of the respiratory clinics have manifested in instances where patients, requiring more than a routine COVID-19 test, were inadequately assessed, leading to subsequent complications and avoidable visits to emergency departments. This breakdown in the referral process not only jeopardised patient care but also erodes the trust that clinicians place in these designated clinics. 5. Unsung Heroes: Recognising the Vital Role of Medical Reception Staff and Practice Nurses. Amidst the challenges of the pandemic, it is crucial to shine a spotlight on the unsung heroes within our healthcare system, namely GP practice nurses and medical reception staff. These dedicated individuals serve as the backbone of medical practices, play instrumental roles in ensuring the smooth operation of healthcare services. Practice nurses, with their diverse skill sets, make substantial contributions to patient care, encompassing tasks such as administering vaccinations, managing chronic disease clinics, and actively participating in COVID-19 testing and vaccination initiatives. Simultaneously, the medical reception staff, serving as the initial point of contact for patients, undertake critical responsibilities including appointment management, implementing meticulous screening processes, and managing patient flow, especially in the face of the current challenging times. Their unwavering dedication, resilience, and commitment to the well-being of patients are indispensable components of our healthcare system. It is imperative to recognise and acknowledge these unsung heroes for their tireless efforts, as they continue to work diligently to ensure the seamless functioning of medical practices and make substantial contributions to our collective efforts against the myriad of challenges posed by health crises. 6. Personal Experience On a personal note, my^^^^^^^ousin's untimely passing due to COVID-19 in the ^(during the early stages of the pandemic has reinforced the importance of a prompt, decisive, and strong public health response. Integrating lessons learned from both local and international experiences is vital for shaping effective national response strategies. This tragic experience has fuelled my commitment to ensuring that Australia's response strategies are informed by the lessons learned from both local and international contexts. In the dual role of a frontline GP and an individual intimately acquainted with the repercussions of the virus, I stand poised to contribute a unique and valuable perspective to any inquiry. My submission serves as a testament to my clinical leadership, offering insights and recommendations garnered from the front lines of the battle against COVID-19. 7. Reflections on Resilience: Gratitude, Empathy, and Global Realities Amidst the Pandemic In expressing gratitude for the unwavering efforts of our healthcare heroes, it's crucial to extend recognition to Australian authorities, particularly the state-based political leadership, for their collaborative actions in curbing the impact of COVID-19-related deaths in the country. Setting aside political differences, acknowledging the success in managing the pandemic is an overdue testament to the shared commitment to public health. Reflecting on the challenges of lockdowns that occurred three years ago, it's poignant to consider the profound blessing of the presence of close family and friends who weathered those dark days alongside us. The collective memories of lockdown horror stories, isolation, and uncertainty are etched in our minds, underscoring the resilience and solidarity of our communities. Today, standing alongside our loved ones, hearing their voices, witnessing their smiles and feeling their comforting presence, we recognise the invaluable nature of these connections. However, against this backdrop of gratitude, it is essential to confront the stark reality revealed by the World Health Organisation's true excess mortality figures. This serves as a poignant reminder of the global disparities in pandemic impact. While we count our blessings, it is crucial to extend empathy to the millions of shattered families worldwide, whose stories remain untold. Behind each statistic lies a name, a face, a story, emphasising the profound fragility of life. In embracing our gratitude for the presence of our dear ones, there's a simultaneous call for empathy towards those who can no longer share their stories, dreams, and laughter. It serves as a stark reminder of life's fragility and the imperative to cherish each moment with those we hold dear. As we move forward, let these reflections guide us in fostering resilience, solidarity and a deeper appreciation for the interconnectedness of our global community. Conclusion: My unique perspective as a frontline GP and someone who has intimately felt the impact of the virus positions me to offer valuable insights to the Inquiry's discussions. I am committed to actively participating in shaping recommendations that enhance Australia's response to future pandemics, drawing upon my clinical leadership and dedication to improving patient outcomes. I appreciate the opportunity to contribute to this crucial inquiry and look forward to further engagement in the next stages of targeted stakeholder involvement. Sincerely, 'BBS (Syd), BBioMedSc (Melb), AFAIDH, FRACGP and ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0095 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0096 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0096.pdf 6 December 2023 Re: Submission for COVID-19 Response Inquiry To the panel, I provide the following account of my experiences and recommendations relating to the following area of review: International policies to support Australians at home and abroad (including with regard to international border closures, and securing vaccine supply deals with international partners for domestic use in Australia). I am an Australian citizen living in since with my husband and son, who are also Australian citizens. We are settled in My dad, passed away in My husband, son and I were unable to get a flight back to until is a direct consequence of the flight caps imposed on flights to Australia from overseas during the pandemic. Because of the imposition of these flight caps, we missed my dad's funeral and instead had to watch it on livestream. I was unable to be with my family - in particular,^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H at this time of sudden and intense grief, and unable to properly deal with my own grief. Still to this day, I feel a twinge of anger and rage at the memory of sitting on my couch watching the funeral of my dad I ask you to draw on your reserves of compassion to truly think about what that experience was like for me. My country, the place I was born and lived for nd where I hold citizenship, the place that and cared for him throughout his life as an Australian citizen, shut me out and prevented me from saying a proper goodbye. Despite the challenges of the pandemic, my experience could have been very different in the absence of flight caps. My husband, son and I could have taken a flight t^^^^^^^^traight away and completed two weeks' quarantine in time for us to attend the funeral, which was held^^^ ^^^|after my dad died, and be with my family at this time of grief. To finally get on a flight to after my dad died and share it with only^^ather people was truly dispiriting. What is the point and meaning of citizenship if one cannot enter their country freely? I completely understand why quarantine was required at this stage of the pandemic - indeed, we quarantined on our return to^^^^^^Jin a hotel that we chose from a pre-approved government list and booked at our own expense. Th^^^^^^Hsystem was not perfect, but there was sufficient availability of hotel rooms for us to arrive at the time of our choosing. Recommendation This is my recommendation for the Australian government for future pandemics: do not impose flight caps and impede citizens' rights to enter their country. Instead, devise a quarantine system based on adequate supply of hotel rooms, or provide for home quarantine. I implore you to treat all Australian citizens with respect during future pandemics - those who are in Australia, as well as those who are overseas. I implore you to restore my faith, and the faith of thousands of other Australian citizens who found themselves in similar situations, that our country respects its people and shows compassion to all during troubled times. With best regards, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0096 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0097 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0097.pdf Tony Maddem Ph: December 6, 2023 Dear Members of the Panel / Committee, Firstly, I feel that this “Inquiry” is just an excuse for the Australian Prime Minister, Mr Anthony Albanese to try and^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Hon the former Australian Prime Minister - Mr Scott Morrison. I also feel that this inquiry will be a massive waste of tax payers’ money for the benefit of a bunch of lawyers involved and other over paid “council / board members / chairperson / advisors. Issues that I had with this covid issue was the time that it took for the Australian government to shut down people arriving from china where this virus originated and the poor attitude of state governments closing borders - particularly Queensland and Victoria. I was absolutely disgusted to see countless news stories of people not allowed to attend loved ones funerals, get medical treatment, or be with dying family members, meanwhile those who are rich like celebrities and family members of a large trucking company were allowed to do whatever they want. I was extremely upset to see a young woman from Canberra forced to wear a full PPE suit to view her father’s body and not be allowed to be with her family. The Queensland Premier - Ms Annastacia Palaszczuk conduct was^^^^^H through this whole pandemic - keeping everyone else out, but she went swanning off on holidays to Japan to the Olympics and I’m sure had a Forer Prime Minister Scott Morrison was free to fly between Canberra and his family in Sydney when he wanted for.....fathers day, while many other fathers were not able to return home to their families due to being stuck in another state. In 2020,1 was able to take my family to Queensland after spending over 1 hour waiting for a covid test before leaving. When I arrived, I had to wait in line for over 5 hours with my children to get another covid test in Queensland - the next day the government scrapped this rule. Living on a state border, I regularly had to travel between NSW and Victoria sometimes 3 times a day. Waiting to show these stupid pieces of paper with permission to travel from 1 state to other often added 40 mins to the journey. I’ve had a simpler process crossing international borders. Former Victorian (premier) Daniel Andrews was extremely unfair in the way he kept Victoria in lockdown for the time that he did ^^■it felt like living in a prison at times. His obsession with face masks was a problem also and these in many situations, such as walking out in the open away from others made wearing face masks unnecessary - he wasn’t even able to follow this rule. Australian state governments went into a panic over Covid and wasted billions of dollars on it. They did a good job with vaccination mandates though and this led to Covid being what it is today - just like a cold for most people, but the Australian Government did a very poor job in getting vaccinations available to Australians - they were offered vaccinations early into the pandemic. On a personal note, some close friends were on a cruise on the^^^^^^^H last July / August. They both got Covid,^^Jwas taken off the ship and taken to the despite also having a milder covid, and dementia was not allowed off the ship, despite appeals from his own doctor who had known him for 30 years. spent 3 days wandering the ship looking for^H and died alone - his family did not get to say goodbye to him. Their daughter thought she was going to end up losing both parents. To sum things up this Covid pandemic was a panic. It brought out the in state governments and the inability for the federal government to act appropriately. The Australian Defence force personnel should have been used immediately to deal with issues, the Federal Government should have been responsible for dealing with this pandemic - not different states slamming their doors shut and dealing with it in different ways. This is what cost jobs and money. The Australian Government gave billions of dollars to big businesses and | CEOs like Alan Joyce used the money to justify their own massive bonuses and Australian workers by sacking them and hiring low paid agency workers. There needs to be a revamp of powers between state and federal governments. In the future if there is a pandemic or national crisis - the Federal Government should make all decisions and have total control over managing the situation. As usual, everyday Australians were not looked after in this - governments were just interested in looking after big businesses and scoring points against each other. Tony Maddem ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0097 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0098 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0098.pdf Introduction Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission and share my views and experiences about the Government's COVID-19 response. My key message is the overriding importance of efforts to prevent future pandemics. Perhaps more than any other kind of catastrophic risk, it's within our power to prevent novel pathogens from emerging and to quickly identify, contain and eliminate them if they do. Given the enormity of human and economic costs of pandemics - and that pandemics much worse than COVID-19 are possible - prevention should be our primary goal. I think preventing pathogens from emerging and controlling them if they do should be top priorities for the new Australian Centre for Disease Control. Bernstein et al make the economic case for this in their paper "The costs and benefits of primary prevention of zoonotic pandemics". They show that, even on pessimistic assumptions and without considering the potential impact of promising emerging technologies, significant investment in pandemic prevention is overwhelmingly justified. My comments go primarily to 'preventive health measures' in terms of reference 3. Sources: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8816336/ Engineered pandemics are a significant risk and could be accelerated by advances in Al The Inquiry's terms of reference include preventative health measures. The best preventative health measure is likely to be preventing pandemics from occurring. To do this most effectively, we need to have a good understanding of how pandemics might begin. Historically, zoonoses have been the leading cause of pandemics. This is a significant risk that government policy should address. Looking forward, Gopal et al in "Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics" use a range of tools to estimate the likelihood of different future pandemic scenarios. Their estimates show that dangerous pathogens leaking from labs have likely surpassed zoonoses as the key risk. Even more worryingly, they argue that maliciously engineered pandemics could become the overriding risk unless action is taken. The reason engineered pandemics have become a critical public health concern is rapid progress in biotechnology and the rise of "dual-use" Al products. "Dual-use risks" refers to the risks generated by Ais intended to perform useful tasks if used by malicious actors. Specifically, biotechnology applications using artificial intelligence have capabilities that could amplify the ability of terrorists to harm Australians. The US is taking dual-use risks seriously. On 25 July 2023, the US Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law took evidence about the potential risks of Al from Dario Amodei (CEO of Anthropic), Yoshua Bengio (Turing Award winner and the second-most cited Al researcher in the world), and Stuart Russell (Professor of Computer Science at Berkeley). Committee Chair, Senator Blumenthal began the hearing by highlighting these "dual-use" risks: 'The future is not science fiction or fantasy — it's not even the future, it's here and now. And a number of you [Amodei, Bengio and Russell] have put the timeline at 2 years before we see some of the most severe biological dangers. It may be shorter because the pace of development is not only stunningly fast, it is also accelerating at a stunning pace.' The hearings painted a concerning picture where frontier models will soon have the ability to combine with advances in biotechnology to supercharge the ability of malicious actors to do harm. Dario Amdodei, CEO of Anthropic, agreed with these concerns and called on Government to take action: 'Anthropic is concerned that Al could empower a much larger set of actors to misuse biology... Today, certain steps in bioweapons production involve knowledge that can't be found on Google or in textbooks... We found that today's Al tools can fill in some of these steps... a straightforward extrapolation of today's systems to those we expect to see in 2 to 3 years suggests a substantial risk that Al systems will be able to fill in all the missing pieces, enabling many more actors to carry out large-scale biological attacks... We have instituted mitigations against these risks in our own deployed models, briefed a number of US government officials — all of whom found the results disquieting, and are piloting a responsible disclosure process with other Al companies to share information on this and similar risks. However, private action is not enough — this risk and many others like it requires a systemic policy response.' In response to these hearings, on 30 October 2023, President Biden made an executive order that does two main things. First, it put a timeline on US agencies to develop a framework to ensure the proper screening of synthetic DNA. With or without the additional risks of Al, synthetic DNA is likely the essential input that any malicious or negligent actor would need to engineer a pandemic. Second, it put a range of requirements on Al labs designed to ensure future Al models don't have these "dual-use risks" that could contribute to a future pandemic. While I appreciate that this issue may feel outside the scope of a preventative public health measure - the same was said of clean drinking water, the work of Florence Nightingale or many other advances in public health that came from leaders realising that a vast range of social and technological factors feed into public health. Indeed, the history of innovation in public health is a history of tackling cutting-edge problems that others neglected. Al and synthetic biology are today's versions of those historic problems. Sources: https://medium.eom/@daniel eth/ai-x-risk-at-senate-hearing-71i l-fSyicaOb https://www.theverge.eom/2 22/3/17/22983197/ai-new-possible-chemical-weapons- generative-models-vx https://www.nature.com/articles/s42256-022- 465-9 In an extremely severe pandemic, next-generation PRE may be essential to keep critical infrastructure functioning In the context of Terms of Reference 5, support for industry, including in the context of labour shortages, I recommend that the Inquiry consider the paper by Gopal et al from the Geneva Centre for Security Policy titled "Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics". The paper begins by unpacking ways that pandemic risk is increasing - in particular the possibility of engineered pandemics. The paper also makes a useful distinction between "stealth" and "wildfire" pandemics, which has deep implications for our policy response. Importantly, the paper goes on to explain that in a pandemic worse than COVID-19, workers who operate critical infrastructure may die or refuse to attend the workplace. If that happens, a modern interconnected society would rapidly collapse. The second-order consequences from a lack of electricity causing cascading failures in other critical sectors would far exceed the immediate consequences of the virus. When the Inquiry thinks about support for industry, the primary goal of that support should be keeping the lights on during a future, worse, pandemic. If critical infrastructure fails, other questions like financial support or community support rapidly become irrelevant or impossible. Among the various recommendations, Gopal et al argue that "pandemic-proof personal protective equipment" (P4E) is essential to dealing with the risk of failing critical infrastructure. The argument for P4E is that essential workers (such as those critical to providing food, water, power and law enforcement) need the confidence that they can continue to work without endangering themselves and their loved ones. The paper provides requirements for what this kind of equipment would need to look like. The paper also includes discussions about definitions of essential workers, ways of preparing the workforce and supply chain, and a discussion of social and technological approaches to slowing the spread of future pandemics. I recommend that the inquiry read Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics and treat it as a foundation stone for other recommendations. That is, our first priority has to be actions that take these worst-case scenarios off the table. Action against other elements of the terms of reference are only possible and impactful if we can be confident that we're in a position to prevent a social collapse. Sources: https://dam.gcsp.ch/files/doc/securing-civilisation-against-catastrophic- pandemics-gp-31 Conclusion As technology advances, the scope of public health continues to increase. Contemporaries would have thought that lenses in microscopes, the design of sewers, citrus on ships or a hundred other things had little to do with public health. However, expanding the scope of public health to include emerging issues and new technologies has directly led to substantially better outcomes. This inquiry is a chance to put new and emerging topics at the forefront of how we think about pandemics. Whether it's harnessing the benefits of metagenomic sequencing or addressing the risks of Al - I think it's essential that this Inquiry look to the risks and opportunities of the future. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0098 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0099 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0099.pdf Submission to the Commonwealth Governments Covid-19 Response Inquiry Dear Panel, My name is Bowen Tan and I am a recent graduate from th program a Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission and share my views and experiences about the Government's COVID-19 pandemic response. My submission focuses on two important aspects of pandemic risk/impact mitigation. First, I'll touch on the need for Australia to improve its novel pathogen detection capability, in order to nip potential future pandemics in the bud. Second, I discuss the need to make next-gen PPE available to essential/strategic workers to ensure they're able to continue attending work without risk to them or their families. Point 1: Improving Australia's Novel Pathogen Detection Capability Preventing future pandemics should pair efforts at stopping novel pathogens from emerging, with ensuring we have the plans and technologies to nip them in the bud quickly if the public becomes exposed to them. Taking 17 November as the date of first human SARS-COV-2 infection, there were 44 days between first infection and first response (31 December 2019), 54 days between first infection and genome publication (10 January 2020), and 67 days between first infection and the lockdown of Wuhan (23 January 2020). For SARS-CoV-2, this was enough time to spread across the world. Modelling shows that if Wuhan had locked down one (16 Jan), two (9 Jan) or three weeks (2 Jan) earlier, cases of COVID-19 in Wuhan could have been reduced by 66%, 86% or 95% respectively. Despite this failure, we know that success is possible. We can stop an outbreak from turning into a pandemic if we can quickly enact the right response. During the first year of COVID-19, both Taiwan and New Zealand achieved 100 consecutive days free of community transmission. This was largely due to an understanding of the seriousness of SARS-CoV-2 while case numbers were low. The 2002-2004 SARS, Ebola, and many other examples also demonstrate that containment is possible. I think everyone in the world would wish that Wuhan had the capability to detect a novel pathogen outbreak, disseminate information, and respond in a timely manner. Early detection and action could have led to containment rather than a pandemic - saving millions of lives and trillions of dollars. However, in Australia, we are in no position to criticise China. We also don't have early detection capacity and we don't have plans to contain novel pathogens at jurisdictional or national levels. When a novel pathogen emerges here, we are also unlikely to be able to identify it and act early enough to prevent it from spreading beyond our shores. We can build such systems now and get ahead of the next pandemic. This Inquiry should recommend that the CDC write a white paper proposing options for a national system for the early detection of pathogens, including setting out the costs and benefits of such a system, and put it to the government before the end of 2024. The white paper should explore a mix of proven techniques and emerging technologies - including metagenomics. The goal should be an enduring system that can protect the lives and livelihoods of Australians from the next pandemic. Point 2: Highly Effective PPE for Essential Workers The paper explains that in a pandemic worse than COVID-19, workers who operate critical infrastructure may die or refuse to attend the workplace. If that happens, a modern interconnected society would rapidly collapse. The second-order consequences from a lack of electricity causing cascading failures in other critical sectors would far exceed the immediate consequences of the virus. When the Inquiry thinks about support for industry, the primary goal of that support should be keeping the lights on during a future, worse, pandemic. If critical infrastructure fails, other questions like financial support or community support rapidly become irrelevant or impossible. Among the various recommendations,argue (P4E) is essential to dealing with the risk of failing critical infrastructure. The argument for P4E is that essential workers (such as those critical to providing food, water, power and law enforcement) need the confidence that they can continue to work without endangering themselves and their loved ones. The paper provides requirements for what this kind of equipment would need to look like. The paper also includes discussions about definitions of essential workers, ways of preparing the workforce and supply chain, and a discussion of social and technological approaches to slowing the spread of future pandemics. I recommend that the inquiry read Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics and treat it as a foundation stone for other recommendations. That is, our first priority has to be actions that take these worst-case scenarios off the table. Action against other elements of the terms of reference are only possible and impactful if we can be confident that we're in a position to prevent a social collapse. I'd like to thank the panel again for the opportunity to make this submission. I hope the panel finds these points convincing, and that it enhances the panel's ability to provide effective policy recommendations to the government. Kind regards, Bowen Tan ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0099 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0100 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0100.pdf Commonwealth COVID Inquiry- D Parris Submission I was excited to see Australia announce the creation of a Centre for Disease Control, this seems like the next logical step in the wake of COVID-19. I'm also glad that Australia has commissioned this Inquiry, including to inform the priorities of the new CDC. In this submission I argue that prioritising pandemic prevention is key to strengthening our resilience and preparedness as we move towards a world where pandemics, and particularly bad pandemics, are particularly likely. It is often said that "prevention is better than a cure." Pike et al in "The Origin and Prevention of Pandemics" show that the As such, understanding the origins of pandemics is central to effective prevention. While historical data points to zoonoses as the primary cause, recent studies, such as Gopal et al.'s "Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics," highlight the evolving landscape, where lab leaks and engineered pathogens pose substantial threats. In particular, the emergence of "dual-use" risks from artificial intelligence (Al) and biotechnology is a contemporary challenge that demands attention. Recent hearings in the US Senate Judiciary Subcommittee underscore the rapid pace of Al development and its potential to empower malicious actors in bioweapons production. President Biden's executive order in response to these risks sets a precedent for proactive governance. It mandates the development of frameworks for screening synthetic DNA and imposes requirements on Al labs to mitigate "dual-use risks." I think Australia should consider adopting a similar approach. Expanding the scope of preventative health measures to address Al-related risks aligns with historical public health innovations. The parallels with issues like clean water and infectious diseases addressed by heros like Florence Nightingale, underscore the importance of tackling the challenges of our time, such as Al and synthetic biology. Mitigating risks in intensive animal agriculture is another crucial facet of pandemic prevention. To reduce the risk of pandemics from our food system Australia should investigate the suitability of such interventions: • Implementing straightforward and economical measures, such as proper fencing, vaccination, or zoning, which could substantially decrease the risk of viruses from wild animals spreading to livestock and, subsequently, to humans. This is discussed in detail by Gortazar et al (2015) The wild side of disease control at the wildlife-livestock-human interface: a review. Front. Vet. Sci. 1:27. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2014.00027 • Improving inadequately designed ventilation systems in intensive farming which may release substances, including pathogens, into the environment, heightening their transmission from livestock to both wild and domestic animals. This is discussed in detail by Jones, et al (2013). Zoonosis emergence linked to agricultural intensification and environmental change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(21), 8399-8404. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1208059110 • Increasing the awareness of zoonotic spillover in producers and vets working with livestock. An assessment of Irish farmers found that more than half thought it was impossible to get an infection from sick poultry and over 90% thought it was impossible to get an infection from a healthy-looking animal. Producers and vets are at the front line of zoonotic spillover in the same way that healthcare providers are at the front line of infectious disease. As the "eyes on the ground", their awareness of zoonotic risks, and the actions they take. You can read the original research in Mahon et al, (2017). An assessment of Irish farmers' knowledge of the risk of spread of infection from animals to humans and their transmission prevention practices. Epidemiology & Infection, 145(12), 2424-2435. doi:10.1017/S0950268817001418 • As in the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia could consider pioneering rapid antigen tests or other rapid diagnostics to allow producers to check their livestock routinely and monitor themselves for such illnesses. Agriculture Victoria has recently developed rapid tests for the grape industry. While this is a good step, it's another example of Australia's "biosecurity approaches" having practical measures to help the agricultural industry, but not having practical measures to prevent pandemics or otherwise take a true one health approach. • Other peer-reviewed literature also mentions interventions that fall into 5 categories: stop clearing and degradation of tropical and subtropical forests, improve health and economic security of communities living in emerging infectious disease hotspots, enhance biosecurity in animal husbandry, shut down or strictly regulate wildlife markets and trade, and expand pathogen surveillance at interfaces between humans, domestic animals, and wildlife. The inquiry can read about these in more detail at Vora, et al (2023). Interventions to Reduce Risk for Pathogen Spillover and Early Disease Spread to Prevent Outbreaks, Epidemics, and Pandemics. Emerging infectious diseases, 29(3), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2903.221079 In conclusion, pandemics are a pressing global concern, and their prevention should be a top priority for the CDC. I think we should have a strong and preemptive approach, addressing both traditional risks like zoonoses and emerging threats such as Al-related risks. The inquiry's recommendations should reflect an understanding of the multifaceted nature of pandemic risks to ensure Australia's preparedness for the future. Citations Emerging human infectious diseases and the links to global food production New portable genetic test for phylloxera I Media releases I Media centre I About I Agriculture Victoria Recent Senate Hearing Discussing Al X-Risk I Medium Al suggested 40,000 new possible chemical weapons in just six hours - The Verge Dual use of artificial-intelligence-powered drug discovery | Nature Machine Intelligence The Origin and Prevention of Pandemics - PMC (nih.gov) ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0100 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0101 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0101.pdf Submission for the the COVID-19 Response Inquiry I am a retired nurse living in I was horrified to read about the vaccine injuries that quickly surfaced, when the experimental mRNA vaccine was rolled out across America and Europe in 2021. Instantly some people developed severe neurological deficits like tremors and leg weakness. Others developed skin rashes and inflammatory disorders of the hands and feet. Then the cases of myocarditis started to appear in young males. I wrote to my family and warned them not to take this vaccine as it was causing severe side effects. I kept waiting for the vaccine to be withdrawn from the market. Instead my family like most Australians just believed the media mantra of ‘safe and effective’. Australia just blindly followed the mantra set by the World Health Organisation, a group that later emerged is So far - Australia as soon as the ‘pandemic’ and lockdowns were announced. ^^^■was very interested in fitness and natural health. She has not seen her children for 3 years and now lives in where government control is minimal. My^^^^^^^^^^^^^mdied suddenly after being forced to take her 5th jab, as a condrtiorwnie^mploymen^She had no significant medicaHnistoi^an^wa^themis^well and activ^^n^oronej^eoort stated her cause of death These are highly unusual conditions that normally develop over a long period and have clear signs and symptoms. My has developed , after being mandated to have the vaccine for work, and having two shots of Moderna. is also constantl sick with covid. Prior to the vaccines she was fit and healthy. is now planning to move overseas to live where there is a lower cost of living and less government overreach. The dauohter of the died suddenly after having her Sth vaccine as part of a condition of being in the hospitality industry, had no prior medical history at all and was otherwise fit and planning a marriage and family life. All around me people are becoming sick. I see young people in supermarkets and the post office who have suffered strokes, have pale, unhealthy faces and are chronically unwell. I hear that employers are struggling to find people able to work. ^^^^|friends tell me that 1/3 of the Australian nursing profession has left, due to vaccine mandates or ill health after taking the vaccine. I also hear that large numbers of pregnant women are losing their babies, and those that are born alive have neurological deficits, and are failing their milestones. friends tell me that many Doctors are now unwell, and some are withdrawing from the profession, making the medical shortage even worse. Their injuries are catastrophic and many will spend their lives on disability pensions. Recently a data expert and whistleblower from New Zealand has revealed that for every 1,000 vaccines given, 1 person has died. Yet the media, politicians and health bureaucrates persist in pushing this experimental and deadly drug. Society is being destroyed by this ‘vaccine’. The death and ill health it is causing is literally going to destroy Australia. What are you doing?? Please stop this insanity. Stop the vaccine mandates. Apologise to all the injured peopl^an^he families of those who have died. Fund care for the sick and injured. And pull out of the^^^^| WHO. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0101 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0102 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0102.pdf Dear COVID-19 Inquiry panel, My name I'm ^Hyear oldworking in the energy industry and a concerned Australian citizen. I would like to seize this opportunity to emphasise the critical need for Australia to prioritise endeavours aimed at preventing future pandemics, rather than merely preparing for them. As a young Australian, I have personally felt the profound impact of COVID-19 on various facets of my life, including education and relationships. It seemed that my demographic, for both social and economic reasons, was comparatively less equipped to navigate the challenges imposed by the pandemic. While this experience has provided me with various perspectives on how governments can assist individuals and communities, it is evident that even the most well-managed pandemic entails severe consequences. As such, I strongly believe the primary focus should be on preventing pandemics altogether. I've observed that Australia's governments allocate substantial resources to hazard reduction for other natural disasters, particularly in response to the escalating challenges posed by climate change. However, I am not aware of a parallel commitment to diminishing the likelihood of pandemics, despite the seemingly higher risk to the average Australian. In this context, I wish to highlight several crucial issues that merit attention and consideration to ensure our collective efforts are directed towards effective pandemic prevention. Preventing zoonotic diseases In return for the affordability of meat sourced from factory farms, we witness a stark trade-off - a surge in bacterial infections, once easily treatable, and an alarming rise in pandemics wreaking havoc on lives and livelihoods. Factory farms, akin to pressure cookers, become the breeding grounds for novel pathogens, as highlighted by the UN's projection of a global population reaching 10 billion by 2050. Without transformative shifts in industry or culture, the relentless demand for meat poses an escalating risk. The pursuit of inexpensive meat through intensive farming practices hinges on increasing livestock density. Animals are crammed into factory farms, breathing and defecating in close quarters, fostering an environment conducive to the emergence of novel pathogens. This density accelerates the evolution of these pathogens, facilitated by abundant transmission routes. The negative public health externalities manifest in antimicrobial resistance and the potential for pandemic viruses. The Inquiry must not condone industries profiting at the expense of endangering lives globally. Antibiotic overuse in livestock intensifies the problem, with 70% of global antibiotics allocated to them. Projections suggest a 16% surge in antibiotic usage in Australian farming by 2030, contributing to global antibiotic resistance. In 2020, antimicrobial resistance in Australia resulted in 1,031 deaths, $439 million in premature death costs, and the loss of 27,705 quality-adjusted life years. While steps have been taken to mitigate antimicrobial resistance in livestock, a parallel approach must extend to combat viruses, the primary catalysts for pandemics. Viruses with pandemic potential often originate in wildlife but can leap to humans, posing catastrophic risks. Wildlife hosts viruses harmlessly, but spillover to livestock in farms introduces novel environments and species, facilitating genetic recombination. This process enhances a virus's ability to infect and transmit among various hosts, including humans. Proximity in settings like live markets, animal exports, abattoirs, or factory farms heightens the risk of interspecies transmission, culminating in the emergence of transmissible viruses. The 2009 MINI flu pandemic, originating in swine farms in Mexico, exemplifies the dangers of global animal trading. Australia must mitigate pathogen transmission risks by reducing animal densities in live animal trade, live exports, and factory farming. Biosecurity strategies should mandate practical measures to curb these risks, and if prevention proves too costly or risky, Australia has a responsibility to cease practices contributing to pandemics and antimicrobial resistance. The late Professor Mary-Louise McLaws, an eminent infectious disease control expert, emphasised the imperative to halt live animal trade. Australia must surpass this prediction, embracing policies that safeguard against future pandemics and prevent the slow march towards antimicrobial resistance. Preventing engineered pandemics An imperative facet of pandemic prevention that merits heightened consideration in Australia is the burgeoning threat of engineered pandemics. The Inquiry's terms of reference underscore the importance of anticipating future pandemics, and compelling evidence indicates that effective preparation necessitates a proactive approach to this potentiality. Leading experts, including MIT Professor Kevin Esvelt, caution that the technologies essential for designing, creating, and releasing perilous and unprecedented pathogens could become widely accessible by 2025. The Geneva Security report titled "Delay, Detect, Defend: Preparing for a future in which thousands can release new pandemics" expounds on this concern (refer to Figure 1). In 2021, Professor Brian Schmidt AC, Vice-Chancellor of the Australian National University, expressed profound apprehension about the "democratisation" of biotechnology, foreseeing the imminent availability of mass-market printers capable of manipulating DNA. The fear extends beyond hijacking existing diseases to the creation of entirely novel ones. The subsequent surge in the market for synthetic DNA, specialty reagents, and Al tools amplifies the urgency of addressing this pressing issue. The prospect of a large and diverse group, whether malicious or not, wielding a technology with the potential to cause mass casualties is unequivocally an unacceptable risk. Acknowledging this peril, President Biden issued an executive order on October 30, 2023, mandating the development of a framework within 180 days. This framework focuses on effective screening for risky DNA sequences, best practices for access controls, technical guidance for screening, and robust oversight mechanisms. Currently, approximately 20% of DNA orders undergo no screening, and non-compliance post the stipulated timeline could result in funding cuts. Australia, which already has a permitting regime governing the importation of synthetic DNA, should urgently align with the United States in updating this regime. The Inquiry should recommend that labs importing DNA into Australia adhere to the new screening procedures outlined in the US executive order. While swift action following the US model will address immediate risks highlighted by Professors Esvelt and Schmidt, it is not a lasting solution. Ongoing advancements in biotechnology and increasingly sophisticated Al may enable nefarious users to circumvent regulations unless regulatory frameworks evolve in tandem. To this end, the Inquiry should advise the Department of Industry to collaborate with the Department of Health and the CDC in formulating minimum safety standards for frontier models deployed in Australia. This includes identifying and restricting models with biosafety risks, setting explicit expectations for developers and deployers, and vigilantly monitoring biotechnological advancements to prevent the widespread accessibility of engineered pathogens. Throughout history, pivotal public health issues have been overcome through the ingenuity of individuals who brought fresh ideas and perspectives to the realm of health challenges. As the landscape of public health has expanded, so too has its capacity to enhance both longevity and the quality of life. The essence of this inquiry's terms of reference lies in the pursuit of improvement for the future. Considering the potential severity of future pandemics, the most impactful course of action for the Inquiry is to prioritize pandemic prevention, encompassing a thorough examination of novel ways in which pandemics might unfold in the years to come. While this necessitates grappling with uncomfortable considerations regarding unforeseen topics and emerging technologies, it is precisely these issues that have the potential to wield the most significant influence in securing a healthier and more resilient future. Sincerely, Sources: Biden, J. (2023) Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence. The White House. Engineered Pathogens and Unnatural Biological Weapons: The Future Threat of Synthetic Biology - Combating Terrorism Center at West Point Andrew Leigh MP: Speeches and Conversations"; 16 December 2021; at 18:41 Home I International Gene Synthesis Consortium The Common Mechanism - IBBIS SecureDNA - fast, free, and accurate DNA synthesis screening 20% of DNA isn't screened: httDs://genesvnthesisconsortium.org/#:~:text=The%20lnternational%20Gene%20Svnthesis%20Cons ortium,the%20customers%20who%20place%20them. Disease burden, associated mortality and economic impact of antimicrobial resistant infections in Australia Antibiotic use in farming set to soar despite drug-resistance fears (see table 1) MINI Pandemic - Quick stats Origins of the 2009 MINI influenza pandemic in swine in Mexico ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0102 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0103 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0103.pdf #ContinuityofCare Collaboration Response to the Australian Government's COVID-19 Response Inquiry Executive Summary: The Continuity of Care Collaboration (CCC) appreciates the opportunity to contribute to this critical inquiry. Our unique collaborative model, vision for prioritized healthcare, mission-driven initiatives, and data-driven approaches position us to provide valuable insights into the pandemic's impact on healthcare continuity and recommendations for future resilience. Introduction: The CCC represents a unique spectrum of healthcare stakeholders, including patient organizations, industry, peak bodies, and healthcare providers from public, private, and not-for-profit sectors. Our vision is to ensure all Australians prioritise their healthcare for a productive nation, and our mission is to encourage Australians to maintain their ongoing healthcare needs. As a collective voice in healthcare matters, we do not replace individual member companies but enhance their impact through collaboration. We are a not-for-profit organisation with over 25 members and more information can be found at www.continuityofcare.org.au and further information in the appendix. The two areas where the CCC would like to contribute to are: • Terms of Reference: Key health response measures (for example across COVID-19 vaccinations and treatments, key medical supplies such as personal protective equipment, quarantine facilities, and public health messaging). • Terms of Reference: Broader health supports for people impacted by COVID-19 and/or lockdowns (for example mental health and suicide prevention supports, and access to screening and other preventive health measures). The CCC was an integral partner in public health messaging during the COVID-19 pandemic. This included the well-regarded public health campaign of #dontwaitmate where there were two key elements of public health messaging. The high-level key messages were: • Priority: If you have an acute or chronic health condition that requires a clinical interaction, it is important you have it. This included keeping up with your regular preventative screening tests. • Safety: Clinical providers are ensuring measures to protect patients from COVID-19 infection. This was to ensure that people felt safe in keeping up with their regular healthcare checks and tests, as well as vaccine information. The CCC was a communication channel that achieved the following in the pandemic: • The Collaboration conducted a multi-channel communications campaign including a sustained earned media campaign from April to June 2020 focussing on chronic health conditions. There was high journalist interest in the implications from the fall in healthcare interactions. Continuity of Care Collaboration www.continuityofcare.org #ContinuityofCare Collaboration • The large number of prominent CCC members provided depth and credibility to messages, and storylines could be adapted to member's areas of expertise. • An open letter signed by CCC members was published nationally in Fairfax Media, The Herald and Weekly Times and pharmacy media. • The CCC generated over 75 storylines on the issue featuring spokespeople from the RACGP, AMA, Diabetes Australia, Medicines Australia and The Heart Foundation. • A CCC survey of 729 consumers found 32% of respondents had delayed a GP during the pandemic, and 21% a pathology test. 59% were worried they would be around people with COVID-19 when attending health appointments, and 55% felt it was safe to delay regular appointments if their condition had not changed. • Social media creative was shared throughout CCC channels reaching more than 1.4 million people. A webinar on the CCC aimed at patients had more than 200 register to attend. • London Agency engaged Federal politicians to post social media videos encouraging their constituents to maintain healthcare. Participating MPs included Dr Katie Allen, Dr Michael Freelander, Linda Burney, Graham Perrett, Gavin Pearce and Jason Clare. • Throughout the campaign the CCC engaged with Federal and State Health Ministers and the Department of Health. The CCC key messages featured in the media briefings by Deputy CMO Prof Michael Kidd (2nd May) and also Minister for Health Greg Hunt MP. "If you have missed a test, if you have missed a scan, please go and get it" Greg Hunt, media conference, 28th May 2020 The CCC's Point of Difference: The CCC focuses on seven areas of care: Prevention; Chronic Disease Management; Vaccination; Cancer Screening; Adherence to Medicines; Acute Care Management; and Pathology Testing. These communications across the member group meant that we reached over 2 million Australians and provided the necessary support for people to feel informed and safe. Our response and recommendations are underpinned by authoritative data provided through exclusive partnerships with national and state-based pathology partners. This data- driven backbone allows us to measure the impact of our campaigns and adjust our strategies based on the evolving healthcare requirements of Australians. Healthcare During the Pandemic: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted healthcare engagement in Australia. The CCC, through its authoritative data and analysis provided by Deakin University, has identified concerning trends in pathology testing uptake. Continuity of Care Collaboration www.continuityofcare.org #ContinuityofCare Collaboration This decline has potential long-term repercussions for disease management and preventive health measures. Impact of Government Decisions: The government's response, both at the national and state level, has been critical to managing the pandemic. The CCC acknowledges the complexity of these decisions and their direct and indirect impacts on healthcare access. Our data indicates that clearer communication and a more integrated approach could have mitigated some of these effects. It is imperative moving forward that communications to all Australians remain consistent and educate people for the short-term and long-term. Recommendations for Future Preparedness: Informed by our authoritative data and the collective expertise of our members, the CCC recommends: 1. Strengthening Data Integration: Establishing a framework for real-time data sharing between government health departments and organizations like the CCC. • Timely data i.e. real-time or within a 30-day period is essential to be able to make informed decisions and see key trends in healthcare data that need immediate solutions. 2. Enhancing Communication Strategies: Ensuring clear, consistent, and actionable public health messaging that aligns with data trends and healthcare service availability. • The CCC demonstrated that by working across multiple stakeholder's groups from patients, industry, peak bodies, and patient organisations, that cause, and effect were noted for each decision that was made by the government. For example, when one group was the main implementer of a strategy i.e. vaccine rollout, patients and other organisations were able to identify unintended consequences of the implementation i.e. misinformation or lack of information, and CCC public health messaging was able to be crafted to ensure understanding and the correct information. This was then shared across all CCC members to keep as many people informed as possible. • Another recommendation is that we have one consistent source of messaging. It became very confusing and complex at times with having both Federal Government and State Government messaging and various healthcare protocols. To be prepared for another pandemic, one source of information with a consistent approach from all a National and State perspective is optimal. It also needs to be messaging that is educating Australians for the long-term to ensure that people can make informed choices and decisions about their healthcare. Too often the communications were 'parent-child' rather than peer to peer, which would have resulted in much more clear and effective messaging. • The target audience is Australians requiring regular interaction with medical services and a successful campaign outcome would be a return to pre COVID- Continuity of Care Collaboration www.continuityofcare.org #ContinuityofCare Collaboration 19 healthcare patterns especially in terms of preventative screening tests to ensure cancer diagnoses are diagnosed earlier. 3. Improving Healthcare Access: Developing resilient systems for maintaining healthcare services, including telehealth and digital health platforms, to support continuity of care during crises. • A big step forward for Australian healthcare was the implementation of Telehealth services and e-scripts. This was very welcomed by all patient organisations, peak bodies, and healthcare industries, as it allowed Australians to have choice in the manner in which they access their healthcare services but also provided many patients with a 'safe' way to access services when they did not feel 'safe'. This was very pronounced with patients who were immunocompromised who were avoiding going into hospital care settings to not contract COVID-19. The CCC strong advocates for both Telehealth and E-scripts to become more embedded into the healthcare system as it provides a lot of value for patients and efficiencies within healthcare. • MyHealthRecord is another important tool for Australians to be able to access their health records, pathology tests and vaccination record. This needs to be further implemented and more education around how to access it and fully utilise the functionally of which the CCC can be an integral partner for the government. • The CCC would also advocate for a more integrated system that allows for more timely data access as well as the ability to measure patient outcomes. 4. Investing in Healthcare Infrastructure: Addressing workforce shortages and system inefficiencies highlighted during the pandemic to bolster the healthcare sector's capacity. • This is one of the most important aspects of Australian healthcare. We need to look at innovative ways to attract more staff into the professional healthcare areas and we also need to look at how we resource various areas with task-shifting. We saw during the pandemic, that pharmacists were able to provide COVID-19 and FLU vaccinations at their pharmacies, and this helped to reduce the burden on GP's workloads and also provided Australians with a way to access that was convenient and local to them. We need to see all key stakeholders look at ways to reduce workloads and bottlenecks within the system to ensure efficiencies and cost savings are fully realised. The CCC can play a major role in this with member surveys, stakeholder meetings and Think Tanks. Conclusion: The CCC is committed to working with the government and other key stakeholders to enhance Australia's pandemic preparedness. Our unique collaboration, driven by a shared vision and grounded in data, stands ready to support an Australian healthcare system that is resilient, adaptive, and patient-centred. Continuity of Care Collaboration www.continuityofcare.org #ContinuityofCare Collaboration We thank the Inquiry Panel for considering our submission and look forward to contributing further to the discourse on improving Australia's healthcare system in the face of future challenges. Appendices: • Data reports and analysis from Deakin University. • Case studies demonstrating the impact of CCC campaigns. • Evidence of healthcare engagement trends during the pandemic. DATA REPORTS / CASE STUDIES Two large private pathology laboratories provided access to their weekly testing data compared to the weekly average for February - before COVID-19 restrictions occurred. This allowed the CCC to see trends in consumer behaviour within days of it occurring - far quicker than via sources e.g. MBS data. These insights meant that the CCC could quickly identify and prioritise issues, develop and distribute key messages and then measure impact. Pathology testing rates, March-April 10% o% •10% ■20% ■30% •40% •50% ■60% -70% -80% O?" /sO £ AV O)V Full Blood Court HbAlc HOL Histology — HIV —HFV Lipid Studies PSA As of June 2020, healthcare participation is significantly improved. Private Healthcare Australia data shows general treatment services have rebounded to 85% of normal rates. Pathology testing rates have returned to pre-pandemic levels. In the week of 8th June, testing participation for diabetes (HbAlc) and cancer (histology) exceeded the weekly average for February 2020. Continuity of Care Collaboration www.continuityofcare.org #ContinuityofCare Collaboration Pathology testing rates, March-June 2020 10% 0% 2 -10% * -20% -30% -40% -50% -60% 70% -80% —Pull Blood Count HbAlc — Histology HIV HPV lipid Studies Campaign messaging is pivoting to an onus to make up for missed healthcare with the theme of a "catch up, check-up". The creativity and innovation of the program was that such a large and diverse group of healthcare stakeholders has never engaged to participate on a health issue and mobilised in such a short time. As one CCC member described "we have been able to create something, that Government and others have been unable to do". Given the high stakes and short time frame, a low touch governance model was adopted to enable rapid activation. The combined reach of the CCC members through owned and earned media channels enabled a vast impact. The group's focus on data has enabled accurate identification of high-needs areas and impact measurement. The actions of the CCC were achieved with virtually no campaign budget other than the "sweat equity" of its participants and delivered during a time of significant disruption to the business operations of all members. It is testament to the achievements of the CCC that its model is now being adopted by healthcare organisations in countries including India, Singapore and Malaysia. “We all have a responsibility to keep people safe and healthy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients need to continue with their regular GP visits, pathology testing, vaccinations and taking medications, as we want to ensure that peoples' health is managed now and in the long-term." Elizabeth de Somer, CEO of Medicines Australia, CCC launch media release. Continuity of Care Collaboration www.continuityofcare.org ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0103 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0104 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0104.pdf I am an emergency nurse and academic with more than 20 years of nursing experience in Australia. I have taught undergraduate nursing since 2016 at a I have also recently navigated the aged care system with my Father developing advanced dementia requiring 24/7 care during the COVID19 pandemic. He passed away last year. My feedback regarding the role that Federal Government and National Cabinet, the AHPPC, the Ministry of Health, and the state health governing bodies is that everyone should be coordinating their approach, so the message is the same from all bodies. The advice should be based on EVIDENCE around airborne precautions and the precautionary principle. I was impressed in 2020 when vaccination clinics were created and pop-up covid testing centres were available at a local level. The vaccine roll out was so stressful though! We could see that other countries were getting access to vaccines and the Morrison government was twiddling its thumbs. It took Rudd to make some calls and of the current government to get anything happening.^^^^^^H Additionally, having sick leave entitlements for COVID19 infections for ALL employees was so important. Tracking and tracing the virus to attempt to control the spread was also imperative. But then decisions were made that got rid of all these excellent mitigation strategies. What happened? Why is all of this gone when people are still getting infected and dying from COVID19? My experience as a teacher in an old University building has been appalling. There are 30 students per class squeezed into poorly ventilated classrooms full of young adults, our future nursing workforce no less, and we are being told it is an 'individual responsibility'. The windows are either dysfunctional or nailed closed and there are no HEPA filters or other ventilation options such as ceiling fans and tall ceilings to aid in reducing the viral load in classrooms. No students are wearing masks, and neither are any staff. Then, I leave this work environment to go see my Father in his RACF where I have to don gown, gloves, mask and a face shield as well as complete a RAT before entering to see my deaf Father with dementia I The cognitive dissonance is astounding. I am so grateful that the RACF staff protected my Father so well from COVID19. Who is protecting our university students? The usual response to my emails of concern is that the University executive is following public health advice. This means that the public health advice is putting our future nursing workforce and those who are teaching them at risk of multiple COVID19 infections. Have you seen the long covid statistics? The latest evidence is indicating long term damage with repeated infections. How can you look away from this research? Or how can you read this research and do nothing? The messaging about hand washing instead of mask wearing is so disappointing. Is there no one with enough courage in our government bodies to stand up and report evidence-based advice? As an emergency nurse I have seen nurse after nurse leave the specialty and the whole profession. There are not enough senior staff left to mentor and teach the new staff. This is causing new staff to report high levels of stress and burnout within the first year of their career. This is unacceptable! The current workforce shortage strategy is to fill a leaking bucket with more and more new graduates or foreign trained nurses with no attempts or effective strategies to keep the current workforce. Retention strategies must be a priority. Provide PRE that works - N95 masks with fit testing, HEPA filters in the waiting rooms and ward settings, and improvements in ventilation in all healthcare settings. Regular and consistent health care advice regarding mask wearing indoors and when socialising is paramount with Christmas and holidays coming. Please provide Federal Government advice based on airborne precautions evidence to the public. The hospital system is begging you to help us. So is the education sector. Protect our young people, our nurses, and our communities. This will help us to protect and care for you. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0104 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0107 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0107.pdf TheAustralia Institute Research that matters. Democracy & accountability in the pandemic Democracy & Accountability Program submission to the CO VID-19 Response Inquiry Bill Browne December 2023 Introduction Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry. Given the Inquiry's broad remit, it is not surprising that The Australia Institute's Democracy & Accountability Program has carried out significant research into topics that might be of interest to the panel. This submission outlines how these research papers come under each of the Inquiry's terms of reference. The Program would welcome the opportunity to discuss research findings in further detail. GOVERNANCE Term of reference 1: Governance including the role of the Commonwealth Government, responsibilities of state and territory governments, national governance mechanisms (such as National Cabinet, the National Coordination Mechanism and the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee) and advisory bodies supporting responses to COVID-19. National Cabinet The pall of secrecy cast over National Cabinet documents and deliberations was wholly unnecessary and damaging to public trust. In some cases, such as the bifurcation of energy policy responsibilities, it led to uncertainty and duplication. Democracy & accountability in the pandemic 1 Browne (2021) Vanishing Cabinet: Submission on COAG Legislation Amendment Bill 2021, https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/vanishing-cabinet/ Browne (2021) National cabinet secrecy hurts energy policies, https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/public-sector-informant-national-cabinet- secrecy-hurts-energy-policies/ The role of state governments Australia's states and territories took the lead in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic, supported by constitutional powers and popular mandates. Australia Institute polling research found that Australians rated their state or territory government as doing a better job than the federal government. The paper below asks if Australia's federal nature may have contributed to its relative success in managing the pandemic. It also elaborates on the concerns with National Cabinet and how it could be improved or modified going further. Browne (2021) State revival: The role of the states in Australia's COVID-19 response and beyond, https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/state-revival/ Parliamentary scrutiny In March 2020, New Zealand adopted the Epidemic Response Committee to provide for parliamentary oversight of the government's COVID-19 response while the Parliament was not sitting. The Australia Institute and the National Integrity Committee of former judges urged the Parliament of Australia to follow New Zealand's example. Some 17,900 Australians signed an Australia Institute petition calling on the Australian Parliament to create a New Zealand-style multi-partisan select committee to enable proper accountability and scrutiny of the government's COVID-19 response. Australia Institute polling research found that two in three Australians supported Australia setting up a New Zealand-style parliamentary committee.1 1 The Australia Institute (2020) Former judges call for establishment ofNZ-style multi-partisan COVID-19 parliamentary oversight committee, https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/former-judges-call-for- establishment-of-nz-style-multi-partisan-covid-19-parliamentary-oversight-committee/; (n.d.) We need proper parliamentary scrutiny of CO VID-19 decisions, https://nb.australiainstitute.org.au/covidl9_committee Democracy & accountability in the pandemic 2 Browne (2020) Parliamentary scrutiny during the COVID-19 crisis, https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/parliamentary-scrutiny-during-the- covid-19-crisis/ Browne (2020) Polling - Parliamentary oversight of COVID-19 response, https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/polling-parliamentary-oversight-of- covid-19-response/ In April 2020, the ACT established the Select Committee on the COVID-19 Response and the Australian Parliament established a Senate select committee to provide parliamentary scrutiny. The Australia Institute welcomed the establishment of the Senate committee.2 That month, prominent Tasmanian individuals and organisations signed an Australia Institute open letter calling for an equivalent committee in Tasmania.3 In May and June 2020, Tasmanian crossbenchers endeavoured to establish an oversight committee.4 In 2022, the Tasmanian Public Accounts Committee held an inquiry into the Tasmanian Government's continuing response to the COVID-19 pandemic.5 Minshull & Browne (2020) Parliamentary scrutiny during the COVID-19 crisis in Tasmania, https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/parliamentary-scrutiny- during-the-covid-19-crisis-in-tasmania/ 2 The Australia Institute (2020) Federal COVID-19 parliamentary oversight committee welcomed, https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/federal-covid-19-parliamentary-oversight-committee-welcomed/ 3 The Australia Institute (2020) Broad alliance of Tasmanian organisations call for establishment ofNZ- style multi-partisan COVID-19 parliamentary oversight committee, https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/broad-alliance-of-tasmanian-organisations-call-for- establishment-of-nz-style-multi-partisan-covid-19-parliamentary-oversight-committee/ 4 O'Connor (2020) Joint Select Committee on Tasmania's COVID-19 Response and Recovery, https://tasmps.greens.org.au/parliament/joint-select-committee-tasmanias-covid; Webb (2020) Parliamentary committee to inguire into COVID-19 response and recovery, https://megwebb.com.au/parliamentary-committee-to-inquire-into-the-covid-19-response-and- recovery/ 5 Parliament of Tasmania (2023) Tasmanian Government's continuing response to the COVID-19 pandemic, https://www.parliament.tas.gov.au/committees/joint-committees/standing- committees/public-accounts-committee/completed-inquiries/completed-inquires-2023- 2024/tasmanian-governments-continuing-response-to-the-covid-19-pandemic Democracy & accountability in the pandemic 3 Diminished state capacity Consultants took advantage of the COVID-19 pandemic to further entrench private advice in public decision making.6 Australia Institute research identifies concerns with the advice given by consulting firms during the pandemic, and places these concerns within the wider context of a general trend of consulting firms contributing to poor government decision-making. Shields, Adhikari, & Browne (2023) Neither frank nor fearless, https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/neither-frank-nor-fearless/ Inappropriate use of defence reserves Allan Behm, the head of the Australia Institute's International & Security Affairs Program, criticised the securitisation of major domestic policy problems and the militarisation of public policy management in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Behm (2021) Operation Khaki Creep: Why public policy management is being militarised, https://www.smh.com.au/national/operation-khaki-creep-why- public-policy-management-is-being-militarised-20210801-p58ern.html HEALTH RESPONSE MEASURES Term of reference 2: Key health response measures (for example across COVID- 19 vaccinations and treatments, key medical supplies such as personal protective equipment, quarantine facilities, and public health messaging). Public attitudes to the COVID-19 pandemic response In May 2020, the Australia Institute surveyed nationally representative samples of people in Australia, New Zealand, the UK, the US, Italy and South Korea about the COVID-19 pandemic. Australians and Americans were equally the most likely to report having already lost their jobs and the least confident of keeping their jobs, but Australians maintained high trust in government compared to their American counterparts. New Zealanders 6 Vogelpohl et al. (2022) Pandemic consulting. How private consultants leverage public crisis management Pandemic consulting. How private consultants leverage public crisis management Democracy & accountability in the pandemic 4 were the happiest with their government's response to COVID-19 and recorded the highest level of trust in government advice and recovery. Browne (2020) Global attitudes to COVID-19 pandemic and response, https://www.tai.org.au/content/trust-time-covid-19-global-polling-shows- government-only-institution-trusted-lead-world-out In January 2021, the Australia Institute surveyed Australians on whether Prime Minister Scott Morrison had a responsibility to clearly and publicly criticise a federal Liberal politician who posted misinformation about the pandemic on social media. Three in four Australians agreed (77%), including as many Coalition voters (77%). The Australia Institute (2021) Polling: Prime Minister Morrison's response to COVID- 19 misinformation and the US Capitol riots, https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/polling-prime-minister-morrisons- response-to-covid-19-misinformation-and-the-us-capitol-riots/ The Australia Institute's exit polling following the 2022 federal election asked respondents about 20 issues in the context of whether they were a strength or weakness for the Morrison government. Half of Australians (48%) identified the government's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic as a weakness, 22% as neither, and 30% as a strength. However, the Morrison government scored even worse on most issues than it did on its handling of COVID-19. The Australia Institute (2022) Exit poll - Coalition strengths and weaknesses in the election, https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/exit-poll-2022/ SUPPORT FOR INDUSTRY AND BUSINESS Term of reference 5: Support for industry and businesses (for example responding to supply chain and transport issues, addressing labour shortages, and support for specific industries). Arts and entertainment The arts and entertainment sector was unnecessarily, illogically and cruelly neglected in the support provided to industry during the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, the performing arts were badly affected by COVID-19 restrictions, and polling research found that three in five Australians (58%) supported the industry's request for a $750 million federal relief package for live performance. Democracy & accountability in the pandemic 5 Browne (2020) Art vs dismal science, https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/art-vs-dismal-science/ The neglect of the arts and entertainment sector occurred despite the sector's economic importance and its high level of exposure to the pandemic's economic consequences. Conservative estimates were that, prior to the pandemic, the sector employed 193,600 Australians and contributed $14.7 billion to Gross Domestic Product. Browne (2020) Economic importance of the arts and entertainment sector, https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/background-brief-economic- im porta nce-of-the-arts-and-entertainment-sector/ In 2021, the Australia Institute's Centre for Future Work identified the ongoing, devastating impact of COVID-19 on Australia's arts and entertainment sector and made recommendations to government to reboot the creative sector after the crisis. Pennington & Eltham (2021) Creativity in crisis: Rebooting Australia's arts and entertainment sector after COVID, https://futurework.org.au/report/creativity- in-crisis-rebooting-australias-arts-and-entertainment-sector-after-covid/ The ABC Australia Institute polling research in 2019 and 2020 found that an increasing share of Australians agreed with the general proposition that the ABC's funding should be increased (35%, vs 12% who thought it should be reduced). When the additional funding was associated with the ABC's emergency role, support rose dramatically to three in four Australians (75%). The Australia Institute (2020) Polling - The ABC and public broadcasting, https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/polling-the-abc-and-public- broadcasting/ Democracy & accountability in the pandemic 6 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0107 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0108 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0108.pdf I worked in the healthcare industry on the front line for 17 years. I worked through almost two years of the initial waves of infection with limited and substandard PPE. I was told to re-use cloth gowns, instead of being supplied with impermeable gowns. I was given one mask to be worn for my entire shift, and that mask would often be surgical mask, which was never designed to limit the spread of disease. I saw ICUs being set up and remaining empty for months. I watched nursing staff creating tic toe videos to kill time, because the fear-mongering reduced the number of people who would risk going to the emergency department. Empty beds, empty wards, none of which were being honestly reported by the media or the government. I decided for myself, based on the information that was freely available on the internet in the early months (prior to widespread censorship and dishonest retraction of legitimate research), including information which has subsequently been publicly released through legal avenues, that the risk of being injected with an mRNA experimental gene therapy over-rode any potential benefit to myself or those around me. This included my 88 year-old mother, who also chose not to take the experimental gene therapy. She is still alive and strong, with a healthy immune system and no recent diagnoses of cancer, heart disease, auto-immune disease, stroke, or any other of the thousands of documented side effects from the injected substance. I spent months being confronted at work in public, with leadership attempting to nag and bully me into getting a medical treatment that I did not want and strongly believed to be harmful. My health information was not protected as it should have been per the privacy act. The orchestrated reports by health services around the world and mainstream media did nothing to allay my fears. “Safe and effective” without data is an empty phrase. It was never scientific, research-based advice. It was propaganda, which was forced on the public at every level. Watching as carefully investigated recommendations for a potential pandemic were disregarded: ordering the isolation of asymptomatic healthy people instead of just the unwell; mask mandates put in place in spite of research identifying the dangers of long term mask usage and lack of evidence to support reduction in transmission. Either incompetent or maleficent actors were making decisions. In October 2021 1 was suspended from my job while waiting for the outcome of an exemption application. In February 2022 I was terminated from my job without ever having received a response to my request for an adequate risk assessment. In all my interactions with the health service, my request for a risk assessment was either ignored or answered with the CHO direction states that you must comply. The Commonwealth response that there were no mandates is a blatant lie. A person is not “free to choose” when their livelihood is being threatened. Where there is ANY RISK involved, there must by CHOICE. I worked with a pregnant woman who was highly fearful of the potential damage to her baby if she was forced to comply with these draconian mandates. She adamantly stated that she did not want any injections and would not have them. When the deadline came, she felt force into complying in order to continue providing for her baby and her other children. I worked with doctors who were convinced that the risk of the injection was much higher than the risk of illness or death from Covid. One left work rather than get the injection, but ultimately complied because she was unable to make a living to support her children as a single parent. The adjusted death statistics (people who died from Covid not just with Covid) show that Covid killed approximately the same number of people as the flu does most years; however, the flu was almost totally absent in 2021. The damage done to myself and people I know, in not being able to travel to family events, funerals, weddings, birthdays; in being forced to stay indoors unless it was within very limited guidelines; in not being able to attend school; in not being allowed to be at the bedside of a dying relative; will lead to lifelong trauma responses. The experiment has enough data now to show that countries with minimal intervention and no mandates obtained the best outcomes, including limited damage to the country’s finances and the mental health of its citizens. Countries with strong lock-downs and mandates have fared worse on all levels, including excess death rates, as shown by recently leaked reports from New Zealand, which were not refuted. I have noted a general increased lack of trust in the government, the medical system, and mainstream media since the Covid restrictions were put in place, and, personally, it has caused me to become someone who questions almost everything I believed in the past. I see this as the one positive outcome from the mess that has been the Covid debacle. Commonwealth assisted state government over-reach has damaged the economy, decimated the numbers of available essential workers, ruined the health of many, taken lives and broken families, and all the individuals directly responsible for enforcing the inappropriate rules need to be held accountable for their actions as a matter of urgency. Going forward, we need to learn from the experience, to limit any potential damage in the future. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0108 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0109 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0109.pdf Professor Geoffrey M. Forbes MBBS MD FRACP Gastroenterologist Clinical Professor, Telephone: Facsimile: | e-mail: 7 December 2023 Chair Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, Parliament House, Canberra Dear Ms^^| Re: Submission- COVID-19 pandemic response enquiry I am pleased for the opportunity to provide feedback and suggestion on the management of the COVID-19 pandemic. This submission will focus on the cornerstone of pandemic management being widespread and mandated societal vaccination. Underpinning all aspects of personal and societal health-care management should be clinical rationale and justification. This submission posits that, in relation to widespread and mandated vaccination: • clinical rationale and justification by health authorities was by false premise; and was, or should have been, known by senior administrative medical practitioners to be false in 2021 at the time of vaccine mandate roll-out; and hence • chief health officers, and other medical practitioners in positions of authority to impose vaccine mandates, failed to act in the best interests of the general public; and that • the authority of the chief health officers to implement such public health mandates in the future should be either (a) revoked, or (b) permitted only under a vastly improved means of CHO governance, oversight and accountability. As background, I am a senior ^^H-based specialist physician, presently in private practice, formerly appointed to ^^^^^^^^^^^^1(1995-2016) during which time I had clinical, teaching and clinical governance roles. I have worked in the^^Bandhadsignificant research and development involvements over many years; I hold an adjunct professorial appointment. The contents of this submission are necessarily medical and, in places, may be confusing to the non-medical reader. I would be pleased to discuss any matter arising from this submission as required. During 2020 and 2021, the medical workforce and general public were inundated with health-care commentary from the lay press. For many in the medical workforce, this came as an unusual means by which we received information that we might then apply to our clinical practices. The medical workforce was required by the medical regulator, AHPRA, to comply with health department policy in relation to COVID-19 vaccination (https://www.ahpra.gov.au/News/2021-03-09-vaccination-statement.aspx). This requirement placed practitioners in an invidious situation if health department policy was considered flawed. Some practitioners simply accepted the 'safe and effective' mantra of government and health bureaucracy, without seeking raw data to reflect upon. Others including myself kept abreast of reports in the medical and lay press in order to best provide sage advice and explanation to our enquiring patients in difficult and confronting times. 'Trust me, I'm a doctor...' is inadequate and unreasonable in present-day clinical practice; Professor G Forbes COVID-19 pandemic response enquiry November 2023 1 'trust me, I'm a medical administrator...' is not a conventional means by which medical practitioners take on clinical practice advice. There is little doubt that geographic isolation resulted in different societal outcomes for Australia compared with nations elsewhere. Hospitalisation and death were more frequent for the earlier alpha strain than the mid-2021 delta strain. The late 2021 omicron strain was accompanied by lesser morbidity and mortality again. As with other viral infections such as influenza, certain demographics faired less well with COVID-19 infection- particularly the elderly and those with multiple medical problems. COVID-19 became established in Australia in mid to late 2021 and, for Western Australia, early 2022, with the delta and omicron variants. Early vaccine studies had demonstrated, during the alpha strain era in the northern hemisphere, a reduction in severe disease, hospitalisation and death with COVID vaccination. The magnitude of benefit from vaccination was greatest amongst those at greatest risk of these specific COVID infection outcomes. The young and healthy remain at lowest risk of these outcomes. However, clinical trial 'effectiveness' of vaccination does not imply 'effectiveness' across all clinical scenarios. Accordingly, in September 2021, multiple health authorities were wrong to state or imply that vaccination was effective at reducing transmission of disease during the delta and subsequently omicron eras. Robust data in support of these claims did not exist. A greater understanding of vaccine adverse events was becoming more apparent into mid and late 2021, yet careful and diligent side effect monitoring was not occurring. For example, there were 495 post-vaccine deaths to 2 September, and 719 deaths to 23 December 2021 reported to the TGA (https://www.tga.gov.au/periodic/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-safety-report-23-12-2021), yet the TGA acknowledged that their investigative capabilities in determining cause of death are limited (https://www.tga.gov.au/periodic/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-safety-report-02-12-2021). For this side effect of vaccination alone, this represents an abject failure of monitoring. Thorough adverse effect monitoring is a key tenet of good medical practice for new technologies, in order there can be swift procedural change if the balance of effectiveness and adverse effects changes. It has been my clinical practice to avail myself of current published data that I can apply to the care of my patients; this was my practice as a senior public hospital doctor, and continues to be my practice as a private specialist and clinical academic. As much medical information was being communicated to society by the lay press in 2021, I spent considerable time informing myself of the most recent published clinical data in relation to COVID-19 prevention. Accordingly, when health-care worker mandates were announced and the, evidentl^false. rationale given that vaccination reduced transmission and was 'safe', I wrote to Dr |(WA) on two occasions in September 2021. I concluded: '... the public (and health-care professions) need confidence in health-care advice. It is therefore of grave concern that unsubstantiated and / or scientifically unreasonable claims in support of mandatory vaccination are made by the very individuals or agencies to whom politicians and the remainder of society look, for sound and sage interpretation of available data. By incorrectly purporting that vaccination prevents COVID-19 transmission in an Australian setting in 2021 / 22, false rationale is provided for mandatory vaccination. I will not attempt to speculate why these errors have been made, but it is ourselves as senior medical practitioners who have the reguisite background to digest research / audit data and apply it responsibly to the clinical setting. I will also not attempt to detail problems with the investigation and transparent publication of vaccine adverse events, nor the spectre of societal and individual coercion in receiving vaccines, but these speak to the ethical principles that underpin our medical practices of non-maleficence, justice and personal autonomy that are breached by mandating administration of the provisionally approved vaccines. Although I write with specific reference to vaccine mandates as they relate to health care workers, the principles readily translate to broader society, where vaccine passports and class-segregation based on vaccine status are widely proposed.' Professor G Forbes COVID-19 pandemic response enquiry November 2023 2 In a detailed November 2021 response to me, Dr^^^^^Hmade erroneous claims and justifications for mandating vaccinations, suggesting that the principle of 'proportionality' saw personal autonomy overruled for societal benefit. On 24 December 2021, Dr^^^^^Hexpanded vaccine mandates in WA to include booster vaccines across large segments of society at a time the delta COVID variant was giving way to the more infectious but less harmful omicron variant, and I wrote to him again, concluding: 'I previously contended that mandating vaccination seriously breached important medical ethical principles of non- maleficence, justice and personal autonomy. Now with the omicron variant dominant, there are insufficient data to even fulfil the ethical principle of beneficence in a vaccine mandate. I urge you to determine a means by which mandating vaccination is removed with immediate effect, and instead permit for vaccination to be encouraged according to evolving data and recommendations.' The items of correspondence referred to above are in the public domain at https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary Business/Committees/Senate/Education and Emplcyment/Vacci neDiscrimination/Submissions (submission 129, Professor G Forbes); the reader is referred to this reference for the full contents of these items. The adverse outcomes of COVID-19 vaccine mandates and bureaucratic overreach into health-care delivery are difficult, or impossible, to reverse. Many individuals have been vaccine injured; others lost employment; businesses have been closed; education was interrupted; families separated; individuals prevented from accessing medical facilities; trust in health-care delivery negatively impacted; and loved ones left alone at the end of their lives; all for reasons of vaccine mandates. All of these public health outcomes were either intended by, or will have been evident to, Chief Health Officers and others in medical administrative circles. Whilst the correspondence referred to in this submission is between myself and the CHO (WA), Dr’s I anc^^Hwere copied this correspondence; all were members of the AHPCC, the key decision-making committee for health emergencies. Accordingly, whilst individual states implemented their own pandemic­ policies, these were underpinned by a federal collective decision-making process. The contents of this submission are then relevant to all Australian jurisdictions. Why senior medical practitioners, as health administrators, will have not appraised themselves of relevant published data, or collectively misinterpreted or ignored these data, and not taken heed of warnings of false rationale for vaccine mandates is open to others for conjecture. In summary, / contend that Chief Health Officers must never again be afforded the unchecked powers applicable during the COVID-19 pandemic. I believe that it is the failing of the medical profession at this senior level that has not received sufficient focus, and is central to understanding errors in pandemic management. Thankyou for giving this submission your attention. Yours sincerely Geoff Forbes Professor G Forbes COVID-19 pandemic response enquiry November 2023 3 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0109 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0110 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0110.pdf Request for Royal Commission It has been brought to my attention that the Covid Inquiry from the Office of Prime Minister and Cabinet is requesting submissions by December 15. In response I request a proper Royal Commission for a proper investigation into; corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts; mask mandates; lock downs; vaccine mandates, official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission, vaccine injuries; media censorship, silencing of doctors, the role of AHPRAand ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors, and the poor treatment of victims. The community is not happy and is demanding answers that only a Royal Commission can deliver. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0110 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0113 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0113.pdf Office of the Prime Minister Parliament House Canberra, ACT 2600 Australia Office of the Prime Minister Parliament House Canberra, ACT 2600 Australia Dear Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, I am writing to you with deep concern regarding the management of the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically focusing on issues related to vaccine procurement, public health measures, and information dissemination. Given the gravity of the situation and the potential impact on public health and trust, I strongly urge you to consider establishing a Royal Commission to thoroughly investigate the following matters: Corrupt Vaccine Procurement and Secret Contracts: Request a comprehensive investigation into vaccine procurement processes, ensuring transparency and accountability. Examine any potential irregularities, conflicts of interest, or secret contracts that may have influenced the decision­ making process. Mask Mandates and Lockdowns: Assess the efficacy and necessity of mask mandates and lockdown measures, considering their impact on public health, the economy, and individual liberties. Investigate whether these measures were based on sound scientific evidence and expert advice. Vaccine Mandates: Examine the rationale behind vaccine mandates, exploring their legality, ethical implications, and potential consequences. Assess the necessity of such mandates and whether alternative measures could achieve the same public health goals. Official Misinformation and Lies in the Media: Investigate instances of misinformation and deceptive practices in the media concerning the effectiveness of vaccines in blocking transmission. Ensure that accurate and evidence-based information is disseminated to the public. Vaccine Injuries: Scrutinize reported vaccine injuries and adverse effects, determining the extent of their occurrence and the adequacy of support for affected individuals. Assess whether there are systemic issues in reporting and addressing vaccine-related complications. Media Censorship and Silencing of Doctors: Investigate claims of media censorship and the suppression of dissenting voices, particularly from healthcare professionals. Ensure that open dialogue and diverse perspectives are encouraged to promote a robust and informed public discourse. Role of AHPRA and ATAGI in Censorship and Oppression of Doctors: Examine the roles of the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) and the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) in the censorship and suppression of doctors expressing alternative viewpoints. Ensure that regulatory bodies support professional autonomy and freedom of expression. Treatment of Victims: Investigate the treatment of individuals who have experienced adverse effects from vaccination and assess the government's response to their needs. Additionally, review the circumstances surrounding the stonewalling of results from the Adelaide vaccine trial, ensuring transparency in the evaluation of its efficacy. Stonewalling of Adelaide Vaccine Results: Vaxine PTY LTD has a vaccine that has proven to be safe and actually work with results showing limiting of transmission, Vaxine PTY LTD was stonewalled and^^H ^(banned from talking about their vaccine, this is a complete disgrace and disregard of the safety of the people, no vaccine especially from a company with a long history of success as Vaxine. I believe that a Royal Commission would provide the necessary framework to impartially examine these issues, restore public confidence, and ensure that Australia's response to the pandemic is grounded in transparency, accountability, and the best interests of the citizens. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I trust that you will give due consideration to the establishment of a Royal Commission to address these concerns and promote public trust in the government's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. Sincerely, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0113 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0115 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0115.pdf Since the pandemic, I have met and talked with dozens and dozens of people in my community who had a similar experience to myself. So I feel compelled to share mine. I have in the studies with various organisations, who all take a holistic approach to health. I am not an anti-vaxxer, my children are fully vaccinated. Part of my studies however followed the commercial interests of vaccine companies and the persuasive tactics and deals done behind closed doors with large associations, and it appears governments around the world. Luckily early in the pandemic my^^^^^^^^HGeneral Practitioner advised me that the vaccine was NOT safe, NOR effective. So I chose to stay home and exercise with my family during the lockdown. I explored other more effective vaccine options and was in the trial for Dr Nicoli Petrovsky’s vaccine. The government regulating bodies put his work to bed, despite his pre pandemic fame, and more recently also receiving awards. It can only be assumed it was not commercially viable for the government to engage with his ground breaking vaccine work ?? In disbelief I watched as coerced the general public via TV commercials to "get the vaccine". While governments covered childrens plagrounds and advised people to "stay home" The 2nd most important aspect to GOOD HEALTH after sleep, is Movement. My health declined during the lockdown as did most of the people around me - BIG MISTAKE TO encourage no movement and close gyms and Yoga studios. Under the guidance of my doctor I had covid once and recovered very quickly. All of my triple vaccinated friends have had covid twice and sometimes 3 times. It became obvious very quickly that the government were receiving their health advice from global vaccine companies and their marketing departments - which only pushed open minded people to search further for doctors and health professionals who were willing to speak up against the corruption despite the threats from AHPRA. It wasn’t hard to find the truth. Meanwhile people like myself who were not willing to follow the sheep in FEAR were ostracised from the community. Until of course people started to realise that the vaccine was doing NOTHING other than making shareholders happy. Appalling, disgraceful treatment for people who actually have an idea how to take care of their own health. The government need to be transparent about where the funds came from during the pandemic and cut ties with global vaccine companies. They have actually woken a large portion of society up to their Because their vaccine certainly did not eradicate the disease ??? ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0115 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0116 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0116.pdf 8th Dec 2023 Dear Sir/Madam, REQUEST FOR ROYAL COMMISSION INTO AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT AND HEALT REGULATORRY COVID IN HANDLING OF THE COVID PANDEMIC I am writing to request a proper Royal Commission for a thorough investigation into; corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts; mask mandates; lock downs; vaccine mandates, official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission, vaccine injuries; media censorship, and silencing of doctors. The role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors, and the poor treatment of victims should be question. As to why other alternate methods (such as that of Prof. Ian Butterhope) to handle the COVID pandemic was not even considered and totally brushed aside. I request a full investigation to the people who have suffered adverse effects and many of died from the COVID jab. The recent whistle blower from NZ is releasing actual data of people who have died from the COVID jab should be analysed and similar analysis of Australian data is paramount. These victims should be fully compensated. It is in my view that this inquiry is clearly a deliberate attempt by the government to cover its butt and seem to be doing something for the people of Australia on this matter of COVID. There is no sincerity of wanting to make sure the truth and the handling on this pandemic be make known as this inquiry is intended to be a complete whitewash. So, nothing short of a Royal Commission is needed to uncover the TRUTH on this subject matter. Yours sincerely, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0116 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0117 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0117.pdf For a future response to pandemics, a Royal Commission needs to be conducted to properly assess the issues that arose from the government response to Covid 19. - the impact of lockdowns - the compulsory vaccine mandates for an experimental vaccine - the injuries from the vaccine - the role of ATAGI in suppressing information regarding the vaccine dangers, and the procurement process - the inability of the prescribed vaccination to prevent the spread of Covid 19. A Royal Commission will prevent a whitewash of the issues, so that government can be better informed in future decision making. Truth telling should not be avoided by the Albanese government. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0117 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0118 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0118.pdf Submission for the Royal Commission into the Australian Covid response. I am Susan Galea residing in thank you for your consideration. I have 3 areas of concern:- 1) Doctors did not need to be gagged. They are the connection of people to health services and they are professional. No doctor should have been persecuted for their input, they are there to care for their patients. Patients can choose their doctor and can choose whether to follow their advice. 2) Health response was not holistic, it was one size fits all. More attention should have been paid to health guidelines and keeping yourself healthy, enhancing your immune system and preventative factors to enable people to look after themselves. Obesity increases health risk and so help should begiven to tackling that as well. Already legally obtainable substances should have still been available and not outlawed. Exemptions should have been readily granted eg for masks and for injections as some people would have had their own methods to avoid or minimise infection. 3) Instead of locking down populations which did not affect the final outcome as shown by comparing to countries that did not lock down alternatives should have been encouraged. In other words at risk people could have been isolated or kept apart, eg opening hours of supermarkets just for those who thought they were more at risk, that occurred in the UK. The rest of society could have functioned as normal. No enforced lockdowns it should have been voluntary depending on risk. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0118 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0119 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0119.pdf What legal authority did the government have to deny entry of its citizens into the country for prolonged periods before vaccine rollouts? Additionally, what legal authority did the government deny citizens entry based on their vaccination status? Why did the government insist on mask mandates despite the evidence that they offered close to no protection unless they were n95 grade and above? Why did the government not aggressively pursue developing its vaccination program in Australia and stifle the efforts of people like Dr. forcing him and his team to raise a GoFundMe to get funding to develop a vaccine? What was the legal authority of the government mandating vaccines for any workers outside of the medical system? Why were vaccine procurement and contracts associated with it so clandestine and secretive? Why did we insist on Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccine mandates despite having no significant or virtually no impact (under 1%), depending on what statistics you use to block transmission within six months of the rollout? Why did health authorities allow MRNA technology, an entirely untested technology in terms of vaccines, to be used in the vaccines? Where was the risk assessment? ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0119 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0121 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0121.pdf Royal Commission Necessary to Address Australia's Covid 19 Response We need a Royal Commission for a proper investigation into; vaccine procurement and^^M mask mandates; lock downs; vaccine mandates. We had a plan for our next pandemic. The moment Covid 19 was identified as a pandemic, it seems we panicked and copied the approach used in Communist China. Other topics include th and^Hn ^e media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission,^■about the effectiveness and safety of useful proven treatments (HCQ and Ivermectin) and prevention of prescription of HCQ and Ivermectin. Further issues needing investigation are ongoing minimization of the significance and prevalence of vaccine injuries; the role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and doctors, and the poor treatment of victims. There is also the issue of significantly high all cause deaths in 2022 and only recently falling toward previous values. All cause deaths did not rise during the Covid Pandemic. Why did they rise in the following years? Unless there is a Royal Commission covering the above topics, we will be unprepared for the inevitable next pandemic. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0121 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0122 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0122.pdf To Whom it May Concern, I am a Registered Nurse and Nurse Vaccinator in Queensland and I was involved in the rollout of the Queensland Covid vaccination program. At the time I was informed that the vaccines were safe and effective and that to prevent further harm to the community our best chance was to vaccinate and be vaccinated with the Covid-19 mRNA vaccines. It has since come to light that serious harms have occurred to people including stroke, heart attack, and death, plus many others. In fact excess deaths continue currently, picking up dramatically after the rollout of the vaccine program. It is my understanding that 1 in every 800 people suffered a 'severe adverse event' from the vaccines. Having given around 2100 vaccines personally during the three months I was with the program, and mixed and prepared a significant amount myself, it weighs heavy on my mind and heart that I have given a vaccine that could have killed at least two of my patients, including pregnant or breast -feeding mums. It was never my intent to do harm, as a registered nurse it is my role to prevent harm and provide the best healthcare I can to my patients with the aim of relieving and preventing suffering. Based on the guidelines and information I was given by the Australian Government, Queensland State Government The TGA, The WHO and ATAGI I was doing the best thing I could and giving a vaccine that would help save lives, not cost them. I request that in this enquiry consideration is given to the mental health of all clinicians involved who have given what turned out to be a harmful vaccine on the lie that it would be beneficial to people. Another issue I'd like to raise is the compulsory nature of the vaccine. As a healthcare worker I was required to be vaccinated myself to work. I need to have a job for income like most people in this country, and so I too took these vaccines believing them to be beneficial. I should note that the vaccine didn't work because within one month of getting my third shot I contracted Covid myself. I say didn't work because I've received a lot of vaccines and never developed those diseases, for example Hep A and B, Tetanus, MMR to name a few. These traditional vaccines have worked and I've never developed those diseases, but the Covid mRNA vaccine was ineffective and I must say it's the sickest I've ever been as far as I can remember. Lastly I ask that justice be done. That the people involved in creating this virus, and profiting off the harmful vaccine be trialled and jailed. They are criminals guilty of heinous crimes against humanity. They have lied to everyone and made money from their suffering, and worse they've employed quite unwillingly and unknowingly the very people who sought to help the sick and soothe them in their time of need. There is no greater evil. They must be held to account, and they will be held to account, in this life or the next. God himself will hold these people and those who refused to stop them to account. Yours Sincerely, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0122 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0123 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0123.pdf Full Australia Full Stop Australia Submission to COVID-19 Response Inquiry Taskforce. About this submission Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission on this important inquiry. Full Stop Australia is a not-for- profit working to end domestic, family and sexual violence (DFSV) by providing counselling to victim-survivors and engaging in victim-centric advocacy. Our submission draws on resee ci we j dertook c le Jationa Meets lealtf Commissio i regarding the impacts of COVID-19 on people experiencing DFSV (NMHC Research). That project surveyed 69 clients and 13 counsellors from Full Stop Australia about the impact of COVID-19 on mental health. This submission was prepared by Emily Dale, Head of Advocacy and Taran Buckby, Legal Policy Officer at Full Stop Australia. Any questions can be directed to Safety, Mental Health and Wellbeing Impacts of COVID-19 During the COVID-19 pandemic, the safety, mental health and wellbeing of many victim-survivors of DFSV significantly deteriorated. Our NMHC Research found the following impacts arose during the pandemic: • Severe anxiety, distress and exacerbated trauma impacts, due to social isolation resulting from COVID- 19 public health mandates (lockdowns, quarantines and other measures to limit social contact), caring duties and increased life stressors • Increased suicide attempts, suicidal ideation, depression and other mental illness • Prolonged exposure to DFSV at home and increased media reporting on sexual violence • Financial distress and poverty due to loss of employment, lack of employment opportunities, discontinuation of COVID-19 government welfare supports, and inability to afford living essentials or medical bills • Increased homelessness or risk of homelessness, due to unaffordable housing and lack of safe and appropriate crisis or temporary accommodation for those escaping violence and abuse. For victim-survivors of DFSV, the above issues coalesced to produce the following challenges: • reduced access to support services to maintain quality of life and continue therapeutic treatment • loss of protective factors and strategies used before COVID-19 to maintain mental health, wellbeing, resilience and safety • severe isolation from friends, family and community groups, which created barriers to obtaining support and social connection • increased case complexity required multidisciplinary, integrated support across the health, social service, community, police, child safety and justice sectors • escalating violence for victim-survivors unable to escape the perpetrator nor safely seek support from home. Our NMHC Research also found that the effects of the pandemic contributed to a surge in demand for Full Stop Australia's trauma specialist counselling services. In the second year of the pandemic, Full Stop Australia had a 26% increase in calls received and 27% increase in average call duration, compared to the first year. Increased demand and need for extended support times resulted in longer waits before calls could be answered by an Full(iMjW Australia available counsellor. Consequently, there was a 25% increase in unanswered calls in the second year of the pandemic, compared to the first year. Recommendations for an improved pandemic response Mental health should be a key pillar of future pandemic responses The introduction of COVID-19 public health orders, including physical distance restrictions and lockdowns, dramatically changed how victim-survivors of DFSV accessed trauma recovery and mental health support. COVID-19 not only disrupted access to immediate crisis support (for example by limiting access to face-to-face counselling and increasing waitlists for psychological services), but also the continuity of long-term therapeutic support. Our NMHC Research found that the pandemic exacerbated pre-existing mental health challenges and/or created new challenges for many victim-survivors of DFSV. The scale of issues identified in our NMHC Research suggests that mental health and wellbeing was not sufficiently prioritised as part of the COVID-19 response. The Government response to future pandemics would be strengthened by recognising that mental ill-health can be as much of a public health crisis as physical illness. Consideration of mental health risks and access to mental health treatment and support should be a key pillar of future pandemic responses. The Government response should prioritise the provision of accessible, affordable, flexible and meaningful support for victim-survivors. This should include: • increased access to phone, web, online, and telehealth mental health support, alongside in-person support. • offering more than the 20 Medicare-subsidised mental health sessions that were available during the pandemic,1 to those in need of additional support. • for victim-survivors of gender-based violence, offering supplementary Government-subsidised mental health support - either through Medicare or otherwise - in recognition of the significant and ongoing challenges of managing complex trauma. Future pandemic responses should address the risk of escalation of DFSV The COVID-19 pandemic saw a spike in DFSV, with many victim-survivors experiencing unique risk factors - such as inability to escape a violent partner, or difficulty accessing services. A 2021 survey of more than 10,000 women aged 18 and over found that: • Around 1 in 10 (9.6%) women experienced physical violence from their partner in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic • 1 in 4 women (26%) who experienced physical or sexual violence in the 12 months since the start of the pandemic said they had been unable to seek assistance on at least one occasion due to safety concerns • Many women reported an increase in violence in the first year of the pandemic - with 42% saying physical violence increased in frequency or severity, 43% reporting the same of sexual violence, and 49% reporting the same of emotionally abusive, harassing or controlling behaviours.2 1 Pursuant to the Better Access to Psychiatrists, Psychologists and General Practitioners through the Medicare Benefits Schedule (Better Access) initiative. 2 Boxall H & Morgan A 2021. Intimate partner violence during the COVID-19 pandemic: a survey of women in Australia. Research report 03/2021. Sydney: Australia's National Research Organisation for Women's Safety. Full Stop Australia is working to put a full stop to sexual, domestic, and family violence through support, education, and advocacy. E: advocacy@fullstop.org.au FullsHgAustralia The rise in alcohol consumption, mental distress, job losses and financial strain, while not themselves causes of DFSV, amounted to situational stressors that exacerbated the underlying drivers of violence and increased the likelihood, complexity and severity of violence.3 Meanwhile, Full Stop Australia's counsellors reported a dip in help-seeking for sexual violence during lockdown periods, followed by a spike in contact after lockdowns ended. This may be because some people - who may have broken lockdown restrictions to meet up with potential partners - were afraid to seek support due to fear of being reported and penalised for breaching public health orders. We recommend centring these complex challenges in future pandemic response planning. Trauma-and-violence-fnformed workforce training for those responding to gender-based violence People with lived experience of DFSV and frontline workers in the sector have consistently found that trauma- and-violence-informed service provision is critical for victim-survivors to feel safe disclosing their experiences and seeking support. Strengthening future pandemic responses requires investment in trauma-informed and gender-based violence-informed workforce training, at all levels of the healthcare, community, social services, child protection, police and justice sectors. This would build the capacity of these workforces to appropriately and safely respond to DFSV in a timely manner. Investment in mental health and wellbeing support for frontline DFSV workers Frontline workers in the DFSV sector experienced increased challenges during the pandemic. For Full Stop Australia's counsellors, bringing trauma-based work into their home created challenges with separating work from personal life. Counsellors also found it more difficult to undertake their emotionally taxing work from home - where they didn't have the same ability to debrief with colleagues throughout the day. Like other workers who moved from office settings to working from home, Full Stop Australia's counsellors also experienced challenges with managing increased caring duties and home-schooling children alongside work. Finally, counsellors noted the difficulty of providing therapeutic trauma support remotely, and of retaining engagement with long-term clients alongside managing surging call demand during the pandemic. While the infrastructure of working from home is now more evolved should there be a need to revert to pandemic service delivery settings, the issues around worker safety and wellbeing will require ongoing attention. In response to these workforce challenges, future pandemic responses should invest in comprehensive mental health, self-care and wellbeing support packages for frontline DFSV workers, to address vicarious trauma and workforce burnout in circumstances where staff are required to work from home. 3 Ibid. Full Stop Australia is working to put a full stop to sexual, domestic, and family violence through support, education, and advocacy. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0123 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0124 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0124.pdf UNSW UNSWSYDNEY Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law Professor Jane McAdam AO BA (Ho ns) LLB (Hons) Sydney, DPhil Oxford, FASSA FAAL Scientia Professor of Law, Faculty of Law & Justice, UNSW Sydney Director, Andrew & Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW Sydney Research Associate, Refugee Studies Centre, University of Oxford 8 December 2023 Dear Panel Members, The Andrew & Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law at UNSW Sydney welcomes the opportunity to provide a submission to the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry. The Kaldor Centre is the world’s first and only research centre dedicated to the study of international refugee law. The Centre was established in October 2013 to undertake rigorous research to support the development of legal, sustainable, and humane solutions for displaced people, and to contribute to public policy involving the most pressing displacement issues in Australia, the Asia-Pacific region and the world. Since 2020, we have engaged in research concerning the legality of restrictions on human mobility during COVID-19, assessed against States’ obligations under international human rights law. Australian policies have been a particular focus of our research, and we are grateful for an Australian Research Council Special Research Initiative grant (SR200200683) which funded much of this work. This submission focuses on the human rights impacts and legality of Australia’s international border controls. It draws directly on some of our published work, to which we refer you for more detailed analysis. For copyright reasons, we cannot upload this material but can share it with you. • Restrictions on entry: Regina Jefferies, Jane McAdam and Sangeetha Pillai, ‘Can We Still Call Australia Home? The Right to Return and the Legality of Australia’s COVID-19 Travel Restrictions’ (2021) 27 Australian Journal of Human Rights 211-31 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/fullZ10.1080/1323238X.2021.1996529 • Restrictions on exit: Regina Jefferies and Jane McAdam, ‘Locked In: Australia’s COVID-19 Border Closures and the Right to Leave’ (2023) 41 Australian Year Book of International Law 185-231 https://brill.eom/view/journals/auso/41/1/article-p185 8.xml Introduction During the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia went to extraordinary lengths to contain the spread of the virus through border controls. This entailed a near-blanket ban not only on travel to and from the country, but also on movement between the states and territories, and even between local government areas. The idea was that if people could not circulate, then nor could COVID-19. However, over time - and particularly when vaccines became widely available - this approach became increasingly disproportionate and unnecessary. The failure to consider or evaluate the non-COVID-19 related health and human impacts of the measures had significant, adverse impacts on people’s lives - and at times constituted violations of Australia’s obligations under international human rights law. The complex interplay between Commonwealth and state/territory responsibilities with respect to quarantine led to a situation in which internal policy settings aimed at curbing the spread of COVID- 19 resulted in the functional exile of large numbers of people who call Australia home. Rather than a coordinated, holistic and proportionate response aimed at ensuring the health and well-being of Australian citizens at home and those seeking to return from overseas, the Commonwealth and Kaldor Centre for InternationalRefuqeeLa^Faculty of Law & Justice, UNSW Sydney, NSW 2052 AUSTRALIA T +61 I E ABN 57 195 873 179 1 CRICOS Provider Code 00098G National Cabinet effectively endorsed arbitrary caps on the number of incoming travellers, placing an almost singular reliance on hotel quarantine that persisted long after the widespread availability of vaccines and policy alternatives. Restrictions on entry Australia recorded its first COVID-19 case in January 2020, and in March it closed its international borders to all but Australian citizens and permanent residents. Despite a formal legal entitlement to return, the practical effect of Australia’s travel and quarantine measures left tens of thousands of people stranded abroad. From 10 July 2020, Australia set a weekly cap on the number of people permitted to enter Australia, directly linked to the hotel quarantine capacity of the states and territories (even though they and the Commonwealth have concurrent powers for quarantine). This meant that Australia’s international border controls were effectively set by state/territory authorities - something that was ‘virtually unprecedented’.1 The right to enter one’s country is articulated in the core international human rights instruments and is broadly recognized as a fundamental common law right. Under article 12(4) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), States must not arbitrarily deprive a person of their right to enter their own country (whether a citizen or permanent resident). The right to enter is not subject to any exceptions. The only constraining factor is that the right cannot be deprived ‘arbitrarily’. Although it is no longer apparent from the treaty’s text, the drafting records reveal that the notion of ‘arbitrariness’ was intended to connote a sole exception—refusal of entry to an individual who had been lawfully exiled.2 It was considered that illness/health would not be inappropriate grounds for preventing return.3 The UN Human Rights Committee has explained that ‘arbitrariness’ ‘guarantees that even interference provided for by law should be in accordance with the provisions, aims and objectives of the [ICCPR] and should be, in any event, reasonable in the particular circumstances’.4 Thus, at most, the right to enter could only be reasonably curtailed by brief, temporary restrictions that pursued a legitimate objective and were necessary, reasonable, proportionate and based on clear legal criteria. Importantly, Australia needed to show that there were no less restrictive measures that could be taken to safeguard public health—such as quarantine. In our view, Australia’s travel caps constituted an arbitrary restriction on Australians’ right to return home. Restrictions on exit During this same period, extraordinary border controls meant that most Australian citizens and permanent residents were barred from leaving the country. These settings remained in place for two years, despite significant public health developments over this period. They separated people from family and friends abroad; curtailed opportunities for work, education and travel overseas; and created ongoing uncertainty and anxiety about the future. While international law permits limitations on the right to leave a country ‘to protect national security, public order (ordre public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others’,5 the limitations imposed must be necessary, proportionate, the least intrusive measure to achieve the desired result6 and ‘consistent with’ other human rights,7 including the right to be free from discrimination, the right to life, the right to family 1 Jane McAdam and Ben Saul, ‘Under Human Rights Law, Australian Runs Out of Excuses for Leaving Citizens Stranded Overseas’, Sydney Morning Herald (10 December 2020) https://www.smh.com.au/national/under-human- rights-law-australia-runs-out-of-excuses-for-leaving-citizens-stranded-overseas-20201210-p56mc6.html. 2 Stig Jagerskold, ‘The Freedom of Movement’ in Louis Henkin (ed), The International Bill of Rights: The Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Columbia University Press, 1981) 182, 3 See discussion in Regina Jefferies, Jane McAdam and Sangeetha Pillai, ‘Can We Still Call Australia Home? The Right to Return and the Legality of Australia’s COVID-19 Travel Restrictions’ (2021) 27 Australian Journal of Human Rights 221. 4 UN Human Rights Committee, General Comment No 27 (67): Freedom of Movement (Article 12), UN Doc CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.9 (18 October 1999), para 21. 5 ICCPR, art 12(3). 6 Human Rights Committee (n 4) para 18. 7 ICCPR, art 12(3). 2 reunification, the right to be free from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and the right to health. Furthermore, the assessment of necessity should not be static but re-evaluated over time as circumstances change. Our analysis of recently released data regarding outbound travel exemptions reveals that, contrary to these requirements, the form and operation of the outbound travel restrictions bypassed analysis of the intrusiveness and proportionality of the measures themselves, instead shifting the burden to individuals to request an exemption on the basis that preventing their departure was overly intrusive or disproportionate in their particular circumstances. The data on discretionary exemption decision­ making further cast doubt on whether the restrictions were implemented consistently with other human rights. Additionally, the measures were not adjusted as circumstances changed, even as vaccinations became widespread and other measures for controlling the spread of the virus became available. The Australian Border Force bore responsibility for administering discretionary exemption requests. It was also responsible for evaluating whether travellers met an automatic exemption category, although airlines were also tasked with determining whether such an exemption applied. The role of airlines here stretched beyond typical administrative checks and appears to have constituted a form of administrative decision-making. While the automatic and discretionary exemption categories changed over time, they were not clearly delineated and decision-making was characterized by a high-degree of discretion without meaningful access to administrative or judicial review. There were stark differences in approval rates between different categories and countries which raise serious questions of discrimination. For instance, ‘more than two-thirds of exemption requests for travel to the United Kingdom were approved during the period from 1 August 2020 through 25 April 2021, compared to just 46% for India and 59% for China’, during a period in which the UK was experiencing a significant outbreak of COVID-19.8 The International Health Regulations direct that any measures to protect public health ‘shall not be more restrictive of international traffic and not more invasive or intrusive to persons than reasonably available alternatives that would achieve the appropriate level of health protection’ (art 2) and must be implemented with ‘full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons’ (art 3) and ‘applied in a transparent and non-discriminatory manner’ (art 42). Australia’s outbound travel restrictions do not appear to have met these criteria, given that quarantine and other health responses were already in place and additional protective measures became available over time. Numerous aspects of decision-making as to whether exemptions applied in individual cases were characterized by arbitrariness, including the involvement of airlines in deciding whether an automatic exemption was met, as well as inconsistent decisions, the absence of precise criteria, no detailed written reasons for refusal, a lack of review of negative determinations. Conclusion It is highly questionable whether Australia’s wide-ranging and blunt restrictions were necessary, reasonable or proportionate as time passed. The shifting balance of rights and restrictions should have been constantly re-evaluated - and justified - in light of changing circumstances. Furthermore, the failure to consider non-COVID-19 health and human rights impacts when evaluating these factors rendered the analysis incomplete. Finally, multijurisdictional fragmentation, inconsistency and a lack of interoperability between Commonwealth, state and territory systems were significant attendant problems. Had such systems been in place, some of the more extreme limitations on people’s movement may have been avoided. Please do not hesitate to contact us if we can be of further assistance. Yours sincerely, Professor Jane McAdam AO and Dr Regina Jefferies 8 Regina Jefferies and Jane McAdam, ‘Locked In: Australia’s COVID-19 Border Closures and the Right to Leave’ (2023) 41 Australian Year Book of International Law 185, 228. 3 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0124 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0125 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0125.pdf Friday, 8 December 2023 Submission to the enquiry regarding Covid 19. Specific point: vaccine mandates The vaccine mandates had no basis in science. It was published information in December 2020 clearly indicating that vaccines would have no significant impact on virus transmission nor infection. It was eventually revealed that endpoints of transmission and infection were not studied as part of at least the Pfizer vaccine trials. Despite their ability to past legislation to prevent vaccine mandates, the Commonwealth government sat back and allowed states to implement^^^^^| vaccine mandates which have had a devastating impact on the community and individuals. No other aspect of Covid management is more significant than this issue. Australia is a signatory to various instruments, dating back to post-World War II which should have prevented these actions. The people responsible for implementing the vaccine mandates must be held accountable. An honest and just Parliament would indeed do so. Failure to prosecute said people will simply indicate to Australian citizens that their parliament is neither just nor honest. Thank you Regards Dr Tony Dique FRACGP MBBS (Hons) BMedSci (Hons) BAppSc ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0125 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0127 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0127.pdf 8/12/2023 To the Panel of the COVID-19 Response Inquiry, As the a and with a deep interest in mental health, I am compelled to contribute to this inquiry. My unique position has provided me insight into the multifaceted impact of the pandemic, particularly regarding the government's response. Our company experienced significant operational disruptions, financial strain, and a marked decline in the mental well-being of our staff due to these issues. The lack of clear communication and perceived ethical lapses in decision-making processes have compounded these difficulties. The pandemic has highlighted several areas where transparency, ethical practices, and effective communication were critically needed but often lacked. This submission requests a thorough Royal Commission investigation into the following: • Corrupt Vaccine Procurement and Secret Contracts: Transparency in vaccine procurement processes and the public availability of contract details. • Mask and Vaccine Mandates: Evaluation of the necessity, effectiveness, and impact of mandates on individual rights and businesses. • Lockdowns: Analysis of decision-making processes and the socio-economic impacts of lockdowns. • Misinformation in Media and Public Statements: Investigation into alleged misinformation about vaccine efficacy, especially regarding transmission. • Vaccine Injuries and Reporting: Adequacy of mechanisms for reporting and addressing vaccine-related injuries. • Media Censorship and Silencing of Healthcare Professionals: Examination of media practices and the alleged silencing of dissenting medical opinions. • Role of AHPRA and ATAGI: Scrutiny of these bodies in the censorship and alleged oppression of healthcare professionals. • Treatment of Victims: Addressing the needs and concerns of those adversely affected by the pandemic response. Recommendations: • Transparent and Ethical Governance: Ensure all future contracts and mandates are transparent and ethically formulated. • Mental Health Support: Establish comprehensive mental health support for businesses and individuals affected by government mandates and misinformation. • Improved Communication and Accountability: Enhance government communication clarity and accountability in public health messaging and media interactions. The scope of these concerns demands a Royal Commission to ensure a thorough and unbiased investigation. It is crucial for the well-being of our society and the integrity of our governance that these issues are addressed comprehensively. Sincerely, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0127 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0128 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0128.pdf COVID 19 Inquiry Submission By Julia Williams^^^^^| The short duration of time to get submissions in is^^^^|and unprofessional. I request a proper Royal Commission for a proper investigation into^^^^|vaccine procurement and mask mandates; lock downs; vaccine mandates, the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission, vaccine injuries; media censorship silencing of doctors, the role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship anc^^^^^Hof doctors, and the poor treatment of victims of the unsafe COVID ‘vaccinations’. Broader Health & Social Supports The mandates which stopped ‘unvaccinated’ people flying and travelling interstate were against Australian Freedom. I was born here and if I choose move within the Country between States then I have the right to do that, regardless of what my medical history is. Wearing a mask was difficult to breath in. The^^^^^^^H by the media and Government, the gagging of Health Professionals that lead to the social assassination of the ‘unvaccinated’ or anyone who said anything against the safety of the COVID vaccinations was one of the most ^^^^■experiences in my 40 odd years of life. People saying that ‘unvaccinated’ should be refused medical treatment and deserved to die was unfathomable. The Government failing to support Dr protein vaccination and throwing money behind the new mRna vaccines is a failure on so many levels. Support Australian Business and Talent. If this vaccination was available I would have gotten it. But it has been and continues to be, blocked at every opportunity by the biased entity in charge of approving medicines. Financial Support For Individuals I lost my job because I refused the Covid “vaccination”. Even though I worked in a centre with disabled people, I had no direct contact with them. The Government ‘recommendation’ didn’t apply to me as the Bookkeeper. The company’s decision to make it policy that everyone was to have the recommended COVID ‘vaccinations’ was discrimination and unacceptable. I lost most of my income because I didn’t want to be a lab rat. Key Health Response Measures The lockdowns and restrictions of movement, even within Australia meant I couldn’t visit family interstate and they couldn’t come to me. Telling me what I can and can’t do is an infringement on my freedom as an Australian. The people that should have been restricted was foreigners trying to enter our country. People returning from overseas should have been quarantined. I apologise if this is too rushed, but with such a tight deadline, you are making this process The COVID debacle makes me ashamed to be an Australian. Regards Julia Williams ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0128 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0131 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0131.pdf Ridiculous Situation in South Australia during 2022, where unfounded/unscientific govt policy caused unnecessary harm and distress to children and families. Situation as at March 2022... My ^^^^^^Bjaughter is now no longer able to compete at Athletics SA events at the SA Athletics OUTDOORS Stadium at^^^^|as they are now requiring everyone over the age of 12 (and soon over the age of 5!?!) to have received Covid injections in order to enter stadium and compete. Yes, mandating injection for children. For an open air outdoor sport. With experimental, emergency approved gene therapy therapeutic that does not reduce transmission at all, and comes with more risk for children than they are at from covid itself. I understand this disgraceful and discriminatory mandate decision by Athletics SA was driven by its funder, the SA Office of Recreation & Sport. The stadium itself has no such mandate, and other groups using the stadium have no such mandate eg Little Athletics, it's just Athletics SA events. It remains an unprecedented and unforgivable madness of our time that no cost-benefit analysis was ever done on any covid policies employed over the past 2 years, and the world, especially our children, have suffered, and will be suffering the consequences for generations to come. It has been clearly established for some time now by both scientific evidence and real world data that policies such as masks make no difference at all when it comes to transmission, and on the contrary in fact do great harm to children in particular, in diverse and incredibly important social/mental/developmental/psychological/health ways. This is exactly why so many countries around the world are unwinding/cancelling/reversing so many damaging covid policies like lockdown, masks and "vaccination" mandates, and unfortunately Australia remains behind the scientific/data/evidentiary curve. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0131 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0132 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0132.pdf I want to take this opportunity to highlight the importance of Australia focusing on efforts to prevent future pandemics - and not just preparing for them. As a young Australian, I feel like I was especially impacted by COVID-19. It impacted my education and relationships and it felt as if my demographic - for social and economic reasons - was less well-equipped than many others to handle the hardships. While the experience has given me a range of views about the ways the government can support individuals and communities - even the best-managed pandemic will have terrible consequences. I think pandemic prevention should be given much higher priority. It seems to me that Australia’s governments invest heavily in hazard reduction for other natural disasters and are increasing their efforts because of climate change. But I’m not aware of any similar investment in reducing the likelihood of pandemics, despite the significant risks they pose to Australians. Therefore, I’d like to raise a few issues that I think are important and could help us head in the right direction. Firstly, the point is now being reached where humans have the capability to produce novel pathogens. While nature can produce pathogens that are extremely infectious like measles, or extremely fatal like rabies, it is not known to produce pathogens that have both high transmissibility and high mortality. Humans, driven by various motivations, could be close to creating pathogens with both these features - risking pandemics much worse than COVID-19. The combination of open science leading to the publication of dangerous knowledge, democratisation of synthetic biology, and Al-assisted research might mean that a small group of nefarious actors could cause catastrophic harm. Preventing the next pandemic requires making sure that highly skilled bad actors are prevented from having the capability to engineer a novel pathogen. However, a variety of trends are making this a genuine possibility. Open science norms - while typically essential to modern science - sometimes allow the publication of dangerous material. While the scientists who published the genomic sequences of the smallpox virus perhaps may not have foreseen a future where the synthesised DMA was readily available, that information cannot be “unpublished”. I recommend that the inquiry read “Information Hazards in Biotechnology” (2018) by Lewis et al for a deeper understanding of this risk and more examples, including Mousepox and Botulinum toxin H. Similarly, Al models are on the cusp of being able to provide substantial assistance to people doing research and filling tacit knowledge gaps. Again, if action is not taken and models with these capabilities become widely available, we may not be able to “unpublish” them. Overall, I think the Inquiry should task the new CDC with responsibility for tracking the risk that a bad actor could create a pathogen with pandemic potential, and ensuring that safeguards remain one step ahead of that risk. Viruses that originate from wild animal reservoirs require intermediary mixing vessels to gather the right mutations that ultimately enable them to become human-adapted. The best mixing vessels are typically other mammals that have similar respiratory tracts. Therefore, the transmission of these viruses from animals to humans is more likely to occur in settings where human-animal interactions are frequent, such as in animal agriculture. Intensive animal agriculture, in particular, is a breeding ground for pathogens. The conditions in which many hosts are cramped, coupled with the use of antibiotics, may protect against bacterial infections but not viral ones. To prevent contact with wild species that may carry zoonotic diseases, regulations must be put in place for intensive animal agriculture and meat production. While live animal markets further down the supply chain pose a smaller risk compared to intensive animal agriculture, they are still a source of risk. Decreasing interactions between pigs in farms and wild fruit bats has resulted in a drop in incidences of influenza and Nipah virus. Likewise it has been found that when free-range turkeys were prevented from interacting with wild birds, flu incidences decreased. This suggests that wild-animal sources of infections can be controlled through proper regulation of human-animal interactions. Despite this being the case, and being acknowledged by Australia’s jurisdictional biosecurity strategies, I’m not aware of any policy or programs that seek to reduce the risk. To reduce the risk of pandemics from our food system Australia should investigate the suitability of such interventions: • Implementing straightforward and economical measures, such as proper fencing, vaccination, or zoning, which could substantially decrease the risk of viruses from wild animals spreading to livestock and, subsequently, to humans. This is discussed in detail by Gortazar et al (2015) The wild side of disease control at the wildlife-livestock-human interface: a review. Front. Vet. Sci. 1:27. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2014.00027 • Improving inadequately designed ventilation systems in intensive farming which may release substances, including pathogens, into the environment, heightening their transmission from livestock to both wild and domestic animals. This is discussed in detail by Jones, et al (2013). Zoonosis emergence linked to agricultural intensification and environmental change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(21), 8399-8404. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas. 1208059110 • Increasing the awareness of zoonotic spillover in producers and vets working with livestock. An assessment of Irish farmers found that more than half thought it was impossible to get an infection from sick poultry and over 90% thought it was impossible to get an infection from a healthy-looking animal. Producers and vets are at the front line of zoonotic spillover in the same way that healthcare providers are at the front line of infectious disease. As the “eyes on the ground”, their awareness of zoonotic risks, and the actions they take. You can read the original research in Mahon et al, (2017). An assessment of Irish farmers’ knowledge of the risk of spread of infection from animals to humans and their transmission prevention practices. Epidemiology & Infection, 145(12), 2424-2435. doi: 10.1017/S0950268817001418 • As in the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia could consider pioneering rapid antigen tests or other rapid diagnostics to allow producers to check their livestock routinely and monitor themselves for such illnesses. Agriculture Victoria has recently developed rapid tests for the grape industry. While this is a good step, it’s another example of Australia’s “biosecurity approaches” having practical measures to help the agricultural industry, but not having practical measures to prevent pandemics or otherwise take a true one health approach. • Other peer-reviewed literature also mentions interventions that fall into 5 categories: stop clearing and degradation of tropical and subtropical forests, improve health and economic security of communities living in emerging infectious disease hotspots, enhance biosecurity in animal husbandry, shut down or strictly regulate wildlife markets and trade, and expand pathogen surveillance at interfaces between humans, domestic animals, and wildlife. The inquiry can read about these in more detail at Vora, et al (2023). Interventions to Reduce Risk for Pathogen Spillover and Early Disease Spread to Prevent Outbreaks, Epidemics, and Pandemics. Emerging infectious diseases, 29(3), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2903.221079 I think pandemics are one of the most important issues of our time, and expert assessments that the risk of pandemics is increasing are alarming. I think this inquiry should carefully consider how future pandemics could start and ensure it makes specific recommendations to reduce their likelihood. This should include the known mechanisms that have been with humans since time immemorial, such as zoonoses, as well as more recent risks, such as lab leaks, and emerging threats, such as engineered pathogens. Citations • Emerging human infectious diseases and the links to global food production • New portable genetic test for phylloxera I Media releases | Media centre | About I Agriculture Victoria • Revisiting Aum Shinrikyo: New Insights into the Most Extensive Non-State Biological Weapons Program to Date • The Words of a Killer How the Unabomber’s writings helped lead investigators to his door 25 years ago • Information Hazards in Biotechnology - Lewis - 2019 - Risk Analysis - Wiley Online Library ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0132 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0133 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0133.pdf Covid Enquiry December 2023 - Response 1. Invalidity of the Enquiry - the members of the enquiry should resign and call for a fully established Royal Commission into the entire period of the pandemic up to and including the current time. This is the only valid response to what amounts to an intentional cover-up by the Federal Government of this country, considering the immense and ongoing damage done to public health, people’s economic lives and wellbeing, the nature of our democracy and the suspension of legal rights during the emergency phase and the further attempts to constrain the return of human rights in order to continue a process of governance that is perhaps best described as criminal malfeasance by large sections of the bureaucracy and of many elected parliamentarians. 2. The Gross Distortion of Medical Practice - it is clear from evidence now available in the public sphere (despite ongoing attempts by governments, mass media, bureaucracies and significant members of transnational and national corporations to suppress, that proper and long established (going back to Hippocrates) universally accepted medical ethics and practices (“Do no harm”) have been usurped and perverted to advance the interests of some elected and non-elected officials including those in WHO and various Australian bodies through their links to ‘Big Pharma’. The corruption evident through many practices invoked by so-called leaders including lockdowns, masking, social distancing and ‘vaccination’ including mandates have little, if any basis in medical evidence and were designed to exacerbate fear and hence compliance in the population to political ends that make a mockery of medical care and proper practice. Evidence including the falsification of testing through the PCR standards that were applied that further charged the atmosphere of panic and which were known through statements made by prior to the ‘outbreak’ lead to wildly exaggerated claims which caused a “casedemic’ and not a pandemic. The suppression of frontline doctors working in life threatening situations to find appropriate treatments and off-label drug prescriptions prior to the ‘vaccine’ release and the subsequent lies used to pull many of those drugs out of prescription (ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, etc - though many like budesonide continued in use) despite their demonstrated efficacy. The outrageous suppression to life threatening levels of people in their homes such as the infamous Victorian twin towers lockdown which was eventually settled out of court to avoid further embarrassment for the exiting premier Andrews. The disastrous lockdown of schools despite it being known from quite early on that children and young people were at little risk and the disgraceful scare campaign which suggested they may infect and kill their grandparents for example, should they be exempted from ‘vaccines’ etc. There are too many examples to list here but the record is full of them. Worst of all was the failure of the so-called vaccines and the damage they have done and continue to do (excess deaths, etc) and the complete denial by authorities of any exposure of the appalling truth about these toxins. Witness for example, the revelations from the US Michigan court which ordered release of Pfizer documents over the oast two vears which^^^^^^^^H Yet Pfizer and authorities went on to recommend ‘vaccination’ for pregnant women! Consider the recent revelationsfrom^^^^M a highly rated specialist in genetic microbiology His work has been corroborated by other experts around the world including^^^^^^^^^^^| and yet authorities in this country continue to back both Pfizer and Moderna (including investing $ lOOmillion into the production of more mRNA ‘vaccines’ in this country). 3. Malfeasance in government - apart from examples already provided the complete disregard for human life (whilst pretending to be so concerned for ‘safety’) the governments of this country exhibit, they continue to ignore confounding evidence of massive scale coming from not just doctors and medical researchers (many of whom have world class careers and, prior to this fiasco, outstanding records of practice and achievement - now trashed behind the scenes by bureaucracies and such) but also many within their own ranks who whistle-blew. The likes of AHPRA, TGA, ATAGI and others, replicated in corporately captured institutions globally (don’t forget that TGA is around^^^^^^H by ‘Big Pharma”) continue to push their lies as one by one the individuals fade from view (to avoid the inevitable prosecutions?)—has gone from the US FDA/NIAIDS etc,(with their cheersquads intact), and the list goes on: “nothing left in the tank”. But now in New Zealand, one honest man (an unknown database administrator) has revealed the truth for the first time in history. gave warning to his superiors including those in the new government (post Ardern) that he had witnessed a safety signal in their vaccination data. When they refused to make it public (breaking an election promise) and to address it and instead cut him off, he released it globally and it is now sending shockwaves around the world. To reiterate, this is primary source data showing massive rates of death from vaccination - way beyond anything seen in history and something which respected researchers have been calling for, for years (such as associate editor of the The response of the NZ authorities - blame the whistleblower, send armed police to his home, arrest him and accuse him of criminal activity! He gave warning and his warning was based on his simple assessment that the data belongs to the people and when there are such serious warnings in it - it must be made public. The response of government (and it is the response of governments across many countries) it seems, is deny and cover up. 4. And this is exactly what you Enquirers are doing, covering up for the current and the previous governments which have failed and continue to fail their people by not investigating transparently, honestly all the real evidence and seeking to make amends including charging, trying and punishing those who have perpetrated these crimes against humanity. Latest research including this from NZ suggest at least 10 million and anything up to 20 milllion deaths worldwide from the ‘vaccines’. The criminality of Big Pharma and their agents in the health bureaucracies must be investigated. The evidence is now too great. 5. The TRUTH WILL OUT. You Enquirers need to do the right thing and resign, calling for a full Royal Commission - that is the only thing that will save those who have done wrong but who realize their wrongdoing and seek to make amends. Do you have a conscience or will you remain within your elite clique, living a life of pretence and personal advantage? Thank you for your consideration.... ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0133 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0135 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0135.pdf Due to the government’s handling of a flu which was renamed Covid-19 I lost my job due to refusing to get the Covid jab after^^years without a sick day and lost my business for^^^|due to the border closures and lockdowns. I’m requesting a proper Royal Commission for a proper investigation into: 1. corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts - big pharma being paid billions from our taxpayer funds. 2. mask mandates - even though masks do not stop the spread of Covid- 19. Hilarious really. 3. lock downs and border closures - unnecessary, ineffective and so destructive by every measure including the economy, small business of which mine was one. 4. vaccine mandates - I was sacked after ^years without a sick day and was still healthy at the time while most of the rest of my office were ill. Quite Ironic. 5. official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission and vaccine injuries. My own family like so many others has suffered jab injuries including 6. media censorship, silencing of doctors, the role of AH P RA a nd ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors, and the poor treatment of victims. This inquiry is clearly a whitewash, the community is not happy and is demanding answers that only a Royal Commission can deliver. Many of us in the community know nearly 1,000 Australians are dying each week from the Covid-19 jab. That was the official ABS excess deaths figures for 2022 early this year and then at the Senate Enquiry in the middle of the year which suddenly got changed/reduced late this year. That alone warrants a Royal Commission, just if nothing else please investigate and get to the truth of that alone! The families of dead Jab victims and the victims of Jab injuries deserve the truth. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0135 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0136 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0136.pdf As a concerned taxpayer of this Country i am requesting a proper Royal Commission for a proper investigation into; corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts; mask mandates; lock downs; vaccine mandates, official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission, vaccine injuries; media censorship, silencing of doctors, the role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors, and the poor treatment of victims. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0136 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0138 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0138.pdf Given the excessively short period that this Response Inquiry process is open; there is not sufficient time to complete a comprehensive submission. I expect that my comments will be received as my submission. There is certainly sufficient evidence so support a Royal Commission. I request a Royal Commission for an investigation into: - mask mandates - lock downs - vaccine mandates - official misinformation in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission - vilification of the unvaccinated by the media - vaccine injuries - media censorship - silencing of doctors _________ - the role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship & doctors - and, the poor treatment of victims of vaccine injuries ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0138 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0143 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0143.pdf A proper Royal Commission is needed for a proper investigation into; corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts; mask mandates; lock downs; vaccine mandates, official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission, vaccine injuries; media censorship, silencing of doctors, the role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors, and the poor treatment of victims. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0143 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0144 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0144.pdf To whom it may concern, My name i I graduated from and moved to Alice Springs Here I gained employment in line with my qualification as a . Soon after the mandates came into effect and after three and a half months there my employment was terminated as I had not been vaccinated. Following this I was unable to regain employment within my field of^^^^^^Huntil I was successful in my application for a role with th . This set me back significantly financially and caused me significant distress. Regards, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0144 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0145 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0145.pdf As a family we made the decision early on not to get vaccinated with the experimental vaccine. Our house hold consist of 8 people aged 10 12 15 17 45 58 73 74. Five at one stage tested positive to covid. Symptoms were mild in all cases. Even in the 73 and 74 year old. Three members may have had covid but were unsymptomatic. No one has had a second infection and have been exposed to the disease on many occasions since. Compared to people we meet with in our community we appear to have high immunity , most of these got vaccinated and have multiple positives to covid and some have become very ill. Many also have developed immune disorders and some have heart conditions they did not previously have. Local people in the medical industry are talking ,off the record ,of unusually high cases of cardiovascular issues and immune deficits. We are very pleased we made the decision not to get the vaccine and were lucky not to have to for our work place. Many people we know felt forced to be vaccinated for work and financial reasons because of mandates and regret having done so. As many have paid with their health and well being. This matter is of the most extreme significants to the way we are governed and how fear was used along with mandates to control our decisions. A Royal Commision is required to make good on this low point in our governance and some key decision makers will need to be held to account. Yours Sincerely William Bennett ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0145 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0146 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0146.pdf To whom it may concern, In the interests of transparency and full accountability and restoring public trust, please ensure the Commission conducts a thorough and proper investigation into the following: • Vaccine procurement and contracts - full transparency is required as to the process, the decision makers and the publishing of all contracts • Financial incentive tracking in regards to vaccine provider selection and procurement • The role of pharmaceutical lobbyists • PCR test effectiveness • Mask mandates and mask effectiveness • Lock downs and damage caused by lock downs • Vaccine mandates • Vaccine injuries • Excess deaths after vaccine rollout • The role of the media in creating divisions between Australians with denigrating language (anti- vaxxer etc) • Suppression of alternative options and early treatments • Censorship of alternative points of view, lack of open discussion and debate • Official misinformation regarding the ability of vaccine effectiveness i.e. to block transmission • Censiorship of doctors • The role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship of medical practitioners • The role of WHO in influencing or setting policies in Australia The public has a right to transparency on these issues in order to help restore trust in our institutions. Thank you. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0146 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0147 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0147.pdf C19 Inquiry 8/12/2023 15:54 A real attempt at lessons learned would only be possible by way of a Royal Commission, which was promised during the last election by Anthony Albanese, and since his government was elected this represents the popular will of the majority of Australian people. Basic question, why no Royal Commission then? Let's start there, and make it transparent why the government will not keep their promise. Why indeed... Unlike a Royal Commission, the terms and scope of this inquiry are too generic and will not establish the root causes, and therefore no true lessons will be learnt. It is therefore a failure before it even starts, and a waste of time, morale, and tax payers money, at a time when government spending, and therefore debt, continues to grow affecting each and every member of this society for generations to come, especially the young. How can any lessons be learnt without addressing and getting to the bottom of why Australia's existing pre-Covid-19 Pandemic Preparedness plan was sidelined...after establishing the Royal Commission as a first step, this question would be the next step. Answering that question with a full root-cause analysis would identify clearly the terms of reference and framework on where to dig next, and so forth and so forth. Stop throwing sand in our eyes, and start doing your duty. You have a mandate from the population to fulfil. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0147 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0149 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0149.pdf APPRISE AUSTRALIAN PARTNERSHIP FOR Commonwealth Government Covid-19 Response PREPAREDNESS RESEARCH ON INFECTIOUS DISEASE EMERGENCIES Inquiry Submission About APPRISE: APPRISE is a national multi-disciplinary network which aims to provide the interface between Australia's research expertise in infectious diseases and the national and jurisdictional governments charged with ensuring effective responses to emerging health threats. APPRISE was established in 2016 with funding by the NHMRC to establish a Centre for Research Excellence. In 2023-2025, APPRISE is funded by the Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care with a work program focused on four areas: (1) Privileging First Nations Voices, (2) Long COVID, (3) antiviral utilisation, and (4) APPRISE network & platform support. The APPRISE network core operating principles include equity, distributed leadership, multi-jurisdictional participation, and close engagement with both state and federal public health agencies. 1. Enhance the role of community engagement and social science in responses. Relevant Terms of Reference: Governance, Key health response measures, targeting future responses to needs of key populations. The issue: Pandemic risk is not uniform across the Australian population, differing by geography, service access, language, income level and other factors. Research to support public health responses is therefore most effective when community informed and where governance is shared and co-led with affected communities. Public health responses, research and communication can then be tailored to address these differences. COVID-19 response measures were often implemented without sufficient community involvement, leading to inequitable impacts and gaps in access to support and protective measures. Qualitative measures to understand the impact of the pandemic and implemented response measures are also critical, including for understanding and promoting both pharmaceutical (e.g. vaccines, antivirals) and non-pharmaceutical interventions (e.g. masks, physical distancing) and for determining effective infection prevention and control measures. Community engagement and involvement is also critical to counter the surge of dis- and misinformation occurring in the pandemic context, building trusted relationships for the development and distribution of useful and appropriate public health information. Proposed solutions: • To ensure equity in outcomes, strategic co-ordination of research to support public health responses must have leadership and continuous involvement from diverse communities. This includes First Nations researchers and communities, people living with disability, people of diverse genders and ages, and people from geographically, culturally and linguistically diverse communities, as well as researchers and decision-makers who may also be drawn from these populations. • During COVID, a donation from the Paul Ramsay Foundation was granted to APPRISE for First Nations COVID-19 research. A First Nations-led governance arrangement was established to administer the donation, resulting in funding for ten diverse projects led by First Nations researchers. These projects addressed community needs, leading (amongst other things) to insights into appropriate services, resources and protective factors that informed responses to COVID-19 and planning for future pandemics and infectious disease challenges (see https://www.apprise.org.au/project/first-nations-led- projects-funded-for-covid-l 9-research/ for details). This governance model could be adopted and extended for future pandemic research. • Planning and funding for pandemic research should support and enable community engagement and explicitly foster capabilities in social and behavioural science, and in scientific and public health communication. 2. Implement a research strategy with adaptable and co-ordinated funding mechanisms. Relevant Terms of Reference: Governance, targeting future responses to needs of key populations. The issue: The pipeline of basic research (including new vaccine technologies, treatments, pathogen genomics and host responses); translational and implementation research (including diagnostics development and evaluation), clinical, and social research, drives best practice in both public health and clinical care. Research is traditionally funded through multiple avenues including Commonwealth and jurisdictional government instrumentalities (e.g. NHMRC, ARC, MRFF), industry, and philanthropy. This diversity of sources was problematic throughout the COVID-19 response as there was little strategic co­ ordination of research funding and therefore of the research undertaken at both a national and local level, and particularly of research required to inform public health responses. Rapid research initiatives (including those led by State governments) were a welcome addition to the traditional research funding pool for COVID-19, but resulted in some duplication and, for clinical trials, failed to generate studies of sufficient size (and representation) to draw meaningful conclusions. Proposed solutions: • We recommend developing and implementing a national health and medical research strategy to underpin research processes for pandemic response. The strategy should explicitly identify approaches to be used in the event of an emerging infection, including alignment with international efforts such as the WHO Global Research Roadmap developed for COVID-19 (https://www.whc nt/pub ications/m/item/a-coordinated-global-research-roadmap). This should include a process to implement strategic funding for large-scale national projects in the event of an emerging infection, in key domains including clinical trials and behavioural and social science studies. The funding model for large scale studies in the UK is a good example, where proposed studies were designated with Urgent Public Health status (e.g. RECOVERY, PANORAMIC, OCTAVE), enabling large-scale national recruitment and impact. • Equity should be prioritised as a key principle for identifying and funding research priorities in public health emergencies such as pandemics. Focusing on populations who may experience systemic discrimination, have more barriers to accessing healthcare and who are more likely to experience poorer health outcomes will contribute to a more level playing field and produce evidence and solutions leading to more effective responses overall. • Engagement and research with key population groups who may have different disease risks including First Nations people is especially important to support implementation of response measures (see point 1 above). • Early national priority setting with an ongoing engagement forum for researchers, lead public health officials, key affected communities, and research funders, including philanthropists, should be considered to facilitate these large national studies. Such studies should complement and, where possible, harmonise with international efforts. Jurisdiction-based funding may more usefully be allocated to address locally relevant needs. • Industry engagement is key to the development of diagnostics, therapeutics and vaccines. Incentives and opportunities for industry-academic collaboration is needed in both interpandemic and pandemic periods. Rapid mobilisation of key industry partnerships, including funding, is greatly strengthened when the partnership is established in 'peacetime'. 3. Recognise the crucial partnership between research and public health response. Relevant Terms of Reference: Governance, targeting future responses to needs of key populations. The issue: During a pandemic response, there is considerable overlap between the processes of disease surveillance, evaluation of public health responses (see point 4) and research. The establishment of an Australian Centre for Disease Control (ACDC) is likely to be a pivotal development for public health in Australia, but its framing explicitly excludes research and research funding. In the setup and consideration of the goals and functions of the ACDC there needs to be explicit consideration of the changing interface between public health response and research. This will ensure that research can inform responses, and responses are appropriate for the community and context. Sharing of data between jurisdictions and more broadly with academics is a major barrier to understanding disease patterns and generating solutions. Many decisions were made in the pandemic that relied on the interpretation of complex data sets that would have benefited from engagement and collaboration with the research community. Proposed solutions: 2 • The ACDC should establish clear mechanisms for engagement with the research community. These mechanisms should specifically address the context of pandemic response which may differ from 'peacetime' engagement. The agreements should navigate the issues of data sharing in the time of an emergency. • ACDC structures should incorporate a First Nations team to embed First Nations-focussed governance and ensure equity in both 'peacetime' and pandemic activities and responses. • Defined relationships between the ACDC and the research community will also assist with surge workforce activation in the event of an infectious disease emergency. 4. iuild real-time evaluation into responses. Relevant Terms of Reference: Key health response measures. The issue: During COVID, many novel public health response measures implemented rapidly, yet did not have strong accompanying mechanisms for planned evaluation to support optimisation and planning for future outbreaks and pandemics This meant that many of these measures could never be evaluated because the relevant data were not collected at the time. Proposed solutions: • The funding and implementation of public health response measures should include mechanisms for evaluation of impact in as close to real time as possible. This will require the identification of data and indicators that should be measured and tracked over time and would enable evidence from local response measures to be included in evidence synthesis (see point 5 below). This would ideally be done systematically at a national level (e.g. through the ACDC) and include engagement with key populations and communities as emphasised in point 1 above. 5. Establish dear, indusive and transparent processes for evidence evaluation. Relevant Terms of Reference: Governance, Key health response measures, targeting future responses to needs of key populations. The issue: Transparency and independence in the processes for evidence evaluation, synthesis and dissemination are important to build and maintain trust with both the scientific and broader community. Recognising that legislative, administrative, financial, and political factors also play a role in government decision-making, it is important to maintain a clear separation between scientific evidence generation and the subsequent use of evidence by government. Australia established several high-level mechanisms to compile and synthesise the barrage of rapidly evolving evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic. These included the Rapid Research Information Forum led by the Australian Academies of Science and Health and Medical Science and the National COVID-19 Health and Research Advisory Committee (NCHRAC) to advise Australia's Chief Medical Officer. Both committees provided evidence synthesis and briefing to government at high levels, but there were sensitivities about making even the existence of these reports known to other government sectors, let alone the public. State and territory governments also commissioned their own confidential evidence syntheses, with little or no reference to that undertaken at a national level. Further ad-hoc evidence syntheses were offered by academic experts in their own capacity, sometimes through peer-reviewed mechanisms and sometimes direct to the media. On a positive note, the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce was rapidly established and funded by the NHMRC and philanthropy and provided essential and cohesive, highly valued and publicly available guidance to clinicians using real-time evidence review. Proposed solutions: • Co-ordinated, transparent, and independent processes for evidence review should be implemented in key areas of need. Publicly available information should include the topics being reviewed, the timelines for review and any reports resulting from the review. This would minimise duplication of effort and promote the principles of transparency and independence. Resourcing for these processes may be included as a key function of the ACDC, in consultation with relevant experts. 3 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0149 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0150 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0150.pdf Submission to COVID-19 Response Inquiry Colin Kinner, 8 December 2023 CONTEXT I am an experienced science communicator and public health advocate. I am a member of the independent pandemic advisory group OzSAGE, a member of COVID Safe Schools, a Director of The Safer Air Project, founder of the Cie eL r and a member of the organising committee for the World Health Network Clean Air Expo. I have written extensively about COVID, in particular the need for improved public health responses at a national and state level. My submission addresses four key areas in which I believe the government needs to improve its pandemic response. FOCUS ON REDUCING TRANSMISSION Although it has not been stated explicitly, since late 2021 the government has pursued a de facto policy of facilitating widespread COVID infection - often referred to as the "let it rip" policy. Over the last two years the government has systematically dismantled almost all efforts to limit transmission of SARS- CoV-2, including removing all substantive mitigations such as isolation requirements, contact tracing, testing and reporting of case numbers. In parallel, the government has failed to implement the most basic of infection control measures such as improving ventilation, making use of HERA air filters and requiring high-quality masks to be worn in healthcare and aged care settings, despite compelling evidence that these measures would be effective in reducing transmission. This change of course appears to be based on two heroic assumptions, namely that (a) the Omicron variant would be "mild" and cause less harm than previous variants, and (b) it would be beneficial to have large numbers of people infected in order to create lasting population-level "hybrid" immunity. Both of these assumptions are grossly incorrect, and at odds with research findings that have accumulated over the last four years. The push for hybrid immunity has been shown to cause substantial net harm, places people at unacceptable risk, and is based on dubious public health messaging designed to convince people to act against their interests. We have frequently heard the Chief Medical Officer and state Chief Health Officers talking about "very high levels of hybrid immunity", "rich hybrid immunity" and even "building a wall of immunity". While COVID infections do provide some degree of immunity, this immunity is live and gives limited protection against re-infection as more immune-evasive variants continue to emerge. Even a mild acute infection can lead to substantial long-term harm - including Long COVID and increased risk of heart attack, stroke, blood clots, neurological disorders and diabetes. It can also cause immune system dysregulation which in turn increases susceptibility to other infections. Research has also shown that the ha oi VID is :u ul — that is, the risk of a person having adverse health outcomes increases with each infection. As independent experts have been pointing out for some time, the benefits of "hybrid immunity" achieved through widespread infection are significantly outweighed by the harm done by infecting millions of people with this dangerous virus. There was clear evidence that it was a mistake to adopt the "let-it-rip" strategy in late 2021. The fact that it is still at the core of Australia's pandemic response in 2023 is of grave concern. The government must change tack and replace its current laissez-faire approach with one focused on significantly reducing transmission. 1 PROVIDE HONEST PUBLIC HEALTH COMUNICATION The observable evidence is that most Australians are poorly informed about COVID - including how it spreads, what can be done to prevent transmission, or why they should even care about it. At the same time, research over the last four years has shown that SARS-CoV-2 is a virus that should be taken very seriously. Acute COVID is now a leading cause of death, and COVID infection can lead to a wide range of long-term health impacts. The disconnect between perceptions about COVID and reality is stark. It has arisen in part because of failures by public health officials and politicians to provide accurate and candid information to the Australian people. The government has consistently pushed a narrative that COVID is largely in the rear-view mirror, that now that we've had an opportunity to be vaccinated we are successfully "living with COVID", and that COVID is "not exceptional" and can be treated "like any other respiratory illness". The government has focused its communications almost exclusively on the acute phase of infection, and remained conspicuously silent about the long-term health risks that can follow a COVID infection, including the fact that risk increases with each reinfection. Government communications about COVID have also failed to emphasise the fact that COVID is spread primarily via exhaled aerosols. As a result, much of the public health messaging has emphasised respiratory droplets, social distancing and hand-washing. Telling people that social distancing or hand­ washing will protect them from a highly contagious airborne virus is totally wrong, and dangerous. By downplaying the seriousness of the virus, and failing to explain the mode of transmission, the government has led many Australians to not take simple precautions that would protect themselves and others - such as getting vaccinated / boosted, wearing P2 / N95 masks, improving ventilation, using HERA air filters, testing and isolating. Similarly, many organisations have been influenced by government misinformation and are failing to provide safe workplaces - including in key settings such as schools, healthcare and aged care, in which individuals have no choice but to be there, are highly dependent on others to take steps to ensure a safe environment, and have limited ability to advocate for themselves. It is vital that the government launch a candid and honest information campaign to educate the public about the realities of COVID and address widespread misconceptions. Providing accurate and honest information will empower individuals and organisations to make better choices. It will also make it easier for the government to implement public health decisions that may be unpopular, such as mask mandates in high-risk settings. URGENTLY REDUCE COVID TRANSMISSION IN SCHOOLS The overwhelming majority of Australian children have been infected with COVID at least once, with a growing number having been infected two, three, four or more times. Although the acute phase of most infections has been mild, some children get very sick with COVID, thousands have been hospitalised, and while rare, there have been a small number of deaths. The biggest concern for children is the risk of long-term harm in the form of increased risk of blood clots, heart problems, kidney failure and diabetes, Long COVID and potential damage to their immune systems, particularly with repeat infections. Having children bring COVID home to their families is also a major concern. The household secondary attack rate (ie. the likelihood that one infected family member will infect at least one other family member) was around 50% for Omicron BA.5, and likely higher for the most recent sub-variants. St dies have shown that 70% of household infections started with a school-aged index case. 2 Infection of children at school is therefore leading to infection of parents and siblings, more vulnerable family members such as grandparents, and the wider community. The government has failed to provide adequate guidance to schools, and in conjunction with the states and territories, has failed to support schools to implement proven infection control measures such as ventilation, CO2 monitoring and HERA filtration.1 It is clear that many teachers and principals do not understand the long-term risks of COVID, the airborne nature of transmission, the importance of ventilation, or the steps needed to reduce the risk of transmission. As a result many schools are not taking the necessary actions to prevent COVID transmission, and school staff are not modelling positive behaviours such as wearing P2 / N95 masks during times of high transmission. In many cases parents, teachers and principals have been influenced by government misinformation suggesting that COVID is nothing more than a mild illness in children, that COVID doesn't spread in schools, or even that it is good for children to get COVID as a means of building up their immunity. Children have their whole lives ahead of them. It is profoundly wrong to allow children to be repeatedly infected with a virus that could cause them long-term harm. The government should be doing everything possible to prevent children getting infected and re­ infected with SARS-CoV-2. The actions needed to reduce transmission in schools are straightforward, proven to be effective, and not disruptive to children's learning. They include: • Educating schools and families about how and why to prevent COVID infection • Improving ventilation • Using HERA filters to remove virus particles from the air • Avoiding large indoor gatherings and other high-risk settings; and • Actively encouraging staff and students wear P2 / N95 masks at times of high transmission. RESET GOVERNMENT HEALTH ADVICE It is clear that the government has received and acted on health advice that is disconnected from the emerging facts about COVID, and that this has led to substantial and avoidable harm to the Australian people. The government should reset its advice by immediately removing the current Chief Medical Officer and winding down the AHPPC, and replacing them with a fit-for-purpose group of multidisciplinary experts who are well informed and can advise the government appropriately. Importantly, such an expert advisory group must be independent and empowered to provide evidence-based advice without political interference, and without the shroud of secrecy that has been used to obscure decision-making via national cabinet. This expert advisory group could ultimately be embedded in the proposed Australian Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Any continuation of the absurd "let it rip" approach that has been taken by the government will amount to knowingly and deliberately infecting millions more Australians with a virus that causes death and chronic illness. 1 Arguably Victoria has made significant progress in providing clear communication and supporting public schools to implement ventilation and HERA filtration. 3 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0150 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0152 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0152.pdf To whom it may concern, I am writing today for an appeal to a royal commission enquiry on the many failed aspects of the Covid-19 pandemic. As well as being personally affected by the closure of a government facility which was a 'mother and baby unit' when my baby wa^Rveeks old. I was denied access to tfi^acilit^ifteni^Hweek stay and told to either go home or travel a further^Mhours to another facility. This I'm also writing for the enquiry to the corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts; the mask mandates which are still ongoing ton Victorian hospitals and places of health care;Victorian lock downs; vaccine mandates, official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission, vaccine injuries which I personally know many many people who suffered from this and it is well evidenced to have been quite a lot; media censorship, silencing of doctors who I personally knew matched in the Victorian marches, the role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors, and the poor treatment of victims. You need to hold those accountable for what was done to the general population and I'll have you know God knows all so hiding won't get you very far. Come clean, fess us and do the right things. Kind regards, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0152 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0153 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0153.pdf To whom it may concern, I am writing today for an appeal to a royal commission enquiry on the many failed aspects of the Covid-19 pandemic. As well ^aeing personally affected by the closure of a government facility which was a 'mother and baby unit' when my baby wa^jweeks old. I was denied access to th^acilit^ifteni^^Jveek stay and told to either go home or travel a further^Hhours to another facility. This was I'm also writing for the enquiry to the corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts; the mask mandates which are still ongoing ton Victorian hospitals and places of health care;Victorian lock downs; vaccine mandates, official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission, vaccine injuries which I personally know many many people who suffered from this and it is well evidenced to have been quite a lot; media censorship, silencing of doctors who I personally knew matched in the Victorian marches, the role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors, and the poor treatment of victims. You need to hold those accountable for what was done to the general population and I'll have you know God knows all so hiding won't get you very far. Come clean, fess us and do the right things. Kind regards. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0153 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0154 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0154.pdf Please be advised that I request the Government conduct a fully independent Royal Commission into every aspect of the Covid Pandemic. The terms of reference must be very wide rangeing and include the ability to call and and require all evidence and actions of any person the commission considers relevant. That may include any and all federal and state heads of departments and/or current or former members of both state and federal parliaments ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0154 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0155 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0155.pdf I am a living woman from Tasmania. I closed my business because of covid. I didn't qualify for any money in a state or federal capacity because of the ridiculous qualifications. It seemed there was plenty of money for corporations and large businesses both state and nationally but nothing for small businesses. Many in my area also closed. I believe this was part of the plan. The fact that bottle shops could open but gyms and hairdressers couldn't told me this was nothing to do with health, and everything to do with large corporations making loads of money out of people stuck at home. When 100% tax deductions were offered to media corporations to "sell" the covid narrative, i knew this has nothing to do with the truth. When nurses and doctors who happily "put themselves at risk" during the "pandemic" were unceremoniously disposed of for questioning the policies or when they refused to take an experimental drug or loose the job, I knew this wasn't about health at all. When people were told they couldn't go to a bar and stand up if they weren't jabbed, but they could sit, then this was nothing to do with health. When people were told in march 2020 that masks were no defence against viruses, and then nearly 12 months later you weren't allowed to enter a building without one. This was nothing to do with health. There have been over 140 peer reviewed studies showing the dangers to people's health while wearing masks. They used to quite clearly state on their boxes they weren't for virus protection. But again there was a lot of money to be made out of selling masks so that warning was soon removed. Not only do we have billions of tons of toxic waste created by this fear campaign that will not be resolved in 100 years or more! And of course as soon as the masks were mandated, the sickness started to ramp up. This was nothing to do with health and everything to do with fear and profiteering. Worst of all, anyone who questioned any of the decisions or draconian methods imposed on people, the media, with their tax incentives, made people out to be covid deniers or harming granny. Thus again had nothing to do with health and everything to do with dividing communities. And worst of all, if you didn't take the "vaccine" you were harming your community or you'd loose your job. This shows me it had nothing again to do with health. Because saying if you don't put up your umbrella you'll get me wet is basically what the job of a vaccine isn't. The idea of a vaccine is that it is supposed to protect you and no one else. This proved it was all a giant marketing campaign of fear and selling foreign owned corporations products, policies and to hell with any Australian's rights. And then there are the millions who have been injured, murdered, and permanently disabled by this Compulsory "vaccine". With doctors threatened they will loose their jobs for speaking out, it pretty much remains the status quo that unless you drop dead or require an ambulance immediately after taking this poison, then you are abandoned and gaslit by a medical system working in fear or denial of the truth that is going on. Again this to me says its nothing about heath and all about destroying as many people's lives as possible. Not only do we need a royal commission into the draconian methods used over the last 3.5 years, we need the perpetrators of these crimes brought to justice. We need to sever all ties with WHO, UN, WEF, and remove all perpetrators of these criminal corporations who have maimed, injured, murdered and made to suicide millions of Australians and make sure none of this can ever happen again. All the people that publicly got up and "sold" this covid or the jabs to Australians also need to be held accountable and an enquiry made into their personal financial gain they made from their public or private capacity. This truly has been a crime against humanity. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0155 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0156 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0156.pdf Covid response mistakes • Covid response was very flawed and has left incalculable damage. • A complete enquiry needs to assess what was right and wrong about the governments covid response so any mistakes can be avoided in future ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0156 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0157 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0157.pdf (No Subject) From: Simone Weier I want to submit a response requesting a proper Royal Commission for a proper investigation into; corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts; mask mandates; lock downs; vaccine mandates, official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission, vaccine injuries; media censorship, silencing of doctors, the role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors, and the poor treatment of victims. A full royal commission is needed as our country and others are seeing the deadly outcomes from this covid rubbish and the Government seem to do nothing and are not being held accountable. Sent from my iPhone ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0157 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0158 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0158.pdf Regarding: Call for submissions and evidence to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry. Thank you for reading my submission. I will be brief. My submission is about simple law abiding people and the impact of Government policy on our life, health, work, finance, and wellbeing as human beings. I represent myself, my wife, my son, my daughter and her partner, and my two grandchildren in what I’m about to say. 1. We have all always been healthy willing participants in society. We work hard, pay our taxes, help in the community, and always do our best and do the right thing. 2. The state and federal government response to covid destroyed us as a family and as individuals. We may never recover from the barbaric and discriminating policy of our public servants during this time. 3. Because of government policy, none of us were allowed to work or participate in society because we did not consent to take an unapproved, experimental mRNA drug with no long term safety data whatsoever. 4. Yet we were always all healthy individuals during the pandemic and we posed absolutely no health risk to anyone. 5. We were all isolated, discriminated, excluded, violated, demeaned, castigated, and vilified for not succumbing to government pressure and coercion to have a medical procedure which had no safety data whatsoever and no explanation of possible side effects either short or long term. 6. The experimental medical procedure was for a disease that had a 99.95% survival rate and for a virus which for healthy people was nothing more than a seasonal flu. 7. The experimental medical procedure did not stop the transmission of the virus nor did it stop an individual from getting the virus yet it was forced upon me and my family without any consideration to these facts and our legal right to choose what is injected into our bodies. 8. Mask mandates, stay at home mandates, travel restrictions, lock downs - none of these draconian measures have been proven to help stop the spread of an airborne virus yet me and my family were terrorized every day for applying common sense to health and wellbeing as opposed to crazed panic from state and federal members of governments acting like it was the end of the world. 9. Fear reigned supreme instead of information and sound health advise like take vitamin D, exercise, fresh air, good food, positive thinking. On the contrary, we as a citizenry were bombarded every day with fear and anxiety promoting more fear and more stress. We all became fat, miserable and unhealthy. 10. My children and grandchildren have all suffered from metal anguish for being incarcerated in our homes for nearly 2 years. We have all suffered financially without compensation and we have all been made to feel like second class citizens yet we did nothing wrong and broke no law. I believe good and informed government would have adopted the recommendations of the Great Barrington Declaration which basically stated protect the elderly and the vulnerable and to largely continue living in society in the normal way. This was not even considered. It was tunnel vision. Inject everyone young and old. Natural immunity was not even mentioned. Vaccinate, vaccinate, vaccinate - that was the one and only solution. How absurd to think an unproven experimental chemical was going to save us from a virus. It is so ridiculous it is hard to fathom yet because of the insane governance me and my family had to endure years of pain and suffering for no good reason whatsoever. We are still suffering; it has not stopped. And if it happened to me and my family, I reckon it happened to millions of Australians. Please do not allow this to ever happen again. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0158 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0159 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0159.pdf Dear Sir/Madam, I am submitting this paper to you as a result of the complete madness that has occurred over these past 2-3 years. I am a retired woman of senior years and like to help in the community as a volunteer. My points below are areas I wish your Covid-19 Response Inquiry Panel to address so that the citizens of this country never again endure what we have been through. Point 1: ’’Valid Consent” of the Australian Govt. Dept, of Health - Immunisation Handbook, and I quote: VALID CONSENT Valid consent is the voluntary agreement by an individual to a proposed procedure, which is given after sufficient, appropriate and reliable information about the procedure, including the potential risks and benefits, has been conveyed to that individual. As part of the consent procedure, people receiving vaccines and/or their parents or carers should be given sufficient information (preferably written) about the risks and benefits of each vaccine. This includes: • what adverse events are possible • how common they are • what they should do about them Criteria for valid consent For consent to be legally valid, the following elements must be present: 1. It must be given by a person with legal capacity, and ofsufficient intellectual capacity to understand the implications of receiving a vaccine. 2. It must be given voluntarily in the absence of undue pressure, coercion or manipulation. 3. It must cover the specific procedure that is to be performed. 4. It can only be given after the potential risks and benefits of the relevant vaccine, the risks of not having it, and any alternative options have been explained to the person. 5. The person must have the opportunity to seek more details or explanations about the vaccine or its administration. Results: The States and Territories MANDATED employees. I also quote what our Prime Minister Scott Morrison said on Friday 6th August 2021: “We do not have a mandatory vaccination policy in this country. We do not have that. We ’re not proposing to have that. That is not changing. ” The Federal Government stated this was NOT mandatory!! But they lied and people lost their jobs, they were locked out of society and families were torn apart. Solution: The Immunisation Handbook already has the solution. Every person has the right to choose whether they have a medical procedure or not. Point 2: PROVISIONAL APPROVAL ONLY The Australian Government Department of Health -TGA website states: Allfour COVID-19 vaccines which have been granted provisional approval in A ustralia - from Pfizer (Comirnaty), AstraZeneca (Vaxzevria), Moderna (Spikevax) and COVID-19 Vaccine Janssen are also recognisedfor incoming travellers. They also removed drugs readily available, like Ivermectin, so they could provisionally approve the “vaccines”. Interestingly they have now reinstated these drugs. So much deceit in all of the Govt actions. Results: Tens of thousands have died but the Government has denied any link. Not to mention the thousands who are now permanently injured with no compensation or support from this Government. This “vaccine” was rushed through. It was never “Safe and Effective”. The Govt lied to us. Solution: Do the required testing and report HONEST results. Allow the use of drugs that have been available for decades. Support the Australians who have been harmed and provide financially with the allocated funding Point 3: APRHA The primary role of this Regulation Agency is to protect the public and set standards and policies that all registered health practitioners must meet. This Agency gagged doctors by not allowing them to tell patients the truth. And then deregistered them if they followed their conscience. Ensuring patient safety is at the heart of the Hippocratic Oath: First, Do No Harm. Results: Doctors and medical staff have left, or been deregistered, and this has created a huge shortage of medical care across Australia. APRHA have left these deregistered doctors in limbo for years, unable to make a living. And their charges are sited as “Misconduct”. Solution: Allow doctors to abide by their oath and bring integrity and truth back into APRHA and all Medical spheres. Yours sincerely ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0159 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0161 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0161.pdf We the citizens of Australia DEMAND a proper investigation that is a FULL Royal Commission, as an inquiry is clearly only a whitewash for the government to protect its own interests. The evil that the governments (Commonwealth and States) of Australia put Australians through over the last three years is shocking and disturbing and we will never forgive or forget the vaccine mandates, mask mandates, lockdowns and Australian businesses suffering to the point of closure. We need to expose and get answers to the secret and corrupt vaccines and receive truthful information about the secret contracts with manufacturers. We require answers for the illegal vaccine mandates which forced and coerced workers and communities to take these injections when the truth was that the vaccines did not block transmission at all, never did and they knew it. Government and media misinformation, lies and propaganda about these vaccines being safe and effective was anything but honest. We DEMAND the truth about the fear campaign that our governments pushed on all Australians. We DEMAND that the vaccine injuries and vaccine deaths to our fellow Australians be exposed. Let the truth be told. When it's criminal to report crime, you are ruled by criminals. Why did AHPRA and ATAGI silence our doctors and why did our government allow these organisations/bureaucrat bodies to get away with this censorship and oppression of doctors. Nuremburg 2.0 we DEMAND the truth not more government whitewash from an inquiry but a FULL Royal Commission. "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter" Martin Luther King, Jr. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0161 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0162 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0162.pdf I on behalf of 300 of my fellow health care colleagues who have been discriminated against and lost our jobs, strongly request a proper Royal Commission for a proper investigation into; corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts; mask mandates; lock downs; vaccine mandates, official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission, vaccine injuries; media censorship, silencing of doctors, the role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors, and the poor treatment of victims. We deserve and demand answers. Covid-19 didnt wreck our lives and nation - the management of it, the censorship and dictatorship, taking of freedom of choice and our own bodily autonomy, the division the government created and the COVID- 19 VACCINES did. The Australian people are not going to bend over again for something like this. So it is in your best interest to do the right thing and investigate properly. A proper Royal Commission. So that things can be done the right way next time, and not repeat the history that caused enormous heartache and devastation to our Australian Nation. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0162 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0163 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0163.pdf Covid-19 response inquiry submission from Dr Rosemary Faire https://www.pmc.gov.au/covid-19-response-inquiry/ Short Intro about myself My training and work life as an academic have encompassed fields of biological sciences (PhD), psychology (BSc), psychotherapy (Cert), expressive arts therapy (GradDip) and somatic/ movement education (MA). I have taught biology and research methodology at tertiary level. Politically I was a Greens supporter, climate activist with Citizens’ Climate Lobby, and an ABC news consumer until 2021. All that changed when the serious lying about COVID treatments and the injections by government and medical “experts” became obvious to me as a former biologist. I am sending in this submission because I’m giving you, as a member of the “independent” panel, the benefit of a doubt that you are genuinely interested in “inquiring” rather than merely supporting/justifying the Approved Narrative. I am probably wasting my time if you are unwilling or incapable of facing the cognitive dissonance and discomfort which all those who peek behind the curtain experience, or if you have been instructed not to accept the evidence from experts who have been conveniently labelled as “conspiracy theorists” or “antivaxxers” for daring to question the COVID orthodoxy. Terms of Reference I wish to address: https://www.pmc.gov.au/resources/commonwealth-government-covid-19-response-inquiry- terms-reference ...’’Specific areas of review may include, but are not limited to...” From your list of terms of reference: - COVID-19 Vaccinations: anyone who has been paying attention knows there have been huge issues around safety, efficacy, adverse event monitoring which have been raised by experts from Australia and overseas; for example, I refer you to the testimonies of Australian and international experts in the book Too Many Dead produced by the Australian Medical Professionals Society after their event in Canberra recently https://amps.redunion.com.au/too- many-dead: also see research reports from Australian scientists such as Wilson Sy: https:// www.researchgate.net/publication/ 368426122 Australian COVID-19 pandemic A Bradford Hill analysis of iatrogenic excess m ortality, and Canadian expert Denis Rancourt’s analysis of excess mortality data: https:// correlation-canada.org/covid-19-vaccine-associated-mortality-in-the-Southern-Hemisphere/ and specifically Australian data: https://denisrancourt.ca/uploads entries/ 1675971116775 Rancourt%20et%20al%202023%20-%20vDFR%20by%20age%20ISRAEL- AUSTRALIA%20-%20article—9d.pdf and Rancourt et al Probable causal assoc bet Aust all­ cause mort and vacc rollout: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/ 366445769 Probable causal association between Australia%27s new regime of high all­ cause mortality and its COVID-19 vaccine rollout: also see research on the problems of the entire mRNA platform: https://iournals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/ iournal.ppat.1010830: Book on mRNA injections and immunology: https:// doctors4covidethics.org/mrna-vaccine-toxicity/ : Why mRNA platform needs to be banned altogether: https://jessicar.substack.eom/p/igg4-cd4s-and-why-the-lnpmrna-platform : I personally know a young man who has been seriously harmed (myocarditis) by these injections and there are several mechanisms by which such cardiac injury is likely to occur including endotoxin: https://geoffpain.substack.eom/p/pfizer-process-2-endotoxin-myocarditis: and contamination with cDNA: https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/multimedia/urgent-hearing-dna- contamination-mrna-vaccines/: Australian Prof Peter Miller on excess mort and early treatment data: https://healthallianceaustralia.org/2023/06/02/professor-peter-miller/ and https:// healthallianceaustralia.org/articles/australian-excess-deaths-alarming-data/ (the data to back up Peter Miller’s interview); Forensic analysis of Pfizer trial deaths found “evidence of an over 3.7-fold increase in number of deaths due to cardiovascular events in BNT162b2 vaccinated subjects compared to Placebo controls. ”: https://iivtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/86; series critique of the injections and fallout: https://www.opastpublishers.com/open-access- articles/covidl 9-vaccinesan-australian-review.pdf - COVID-19 Treatments: banning by TGA of early treatments (the ivermectin debacle was so obviously a takedown of a treatment by WHO and other regulators using manipulated meta­ analysis httDs://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2ju5v4TAaQ and other excuses; our Australian expert on drug development and experience with TGA, Dr Phillip Altman, repeatedly exposed the TGA ban to be unscientific httDs://DhilliDaltman.substack.com/D/oDen-letter-to-the-tga- regarding): - COVID-19 Treatment protocols requiring doctors adhere to treatments such as ventilation, remdesivir and DNR pathways that caused iatrogenic harm to patients in hospitals; I have no direct experience of what went on in Australian hospitals thank goodness, but my doctor did tell me that they were using remdesivir, a drug with known deleterious effects on renal function; even the bizarre instructions given to the public about there being “no treatments” and to stay home and wait until their symptoms worsen sufficiently to be hospitalised, departed so strongly from ANY previous medical guidelines that they must be investigated fully as to their origin and motivation (aka, the obvious one of selling the “vaccines” down the track); Deadly hospital protocols - 25 commonalities from victim testimonies: httDs://chbmD.org/commonalities/ : - Public Health Messaging - censorship in MSM of every perspective except the government Narrative; outright lies in messaging (“dangerous horse pill”; “Safe & Effective”; “vanishingly rare” adverse events); messaging was downright abusive (Abuse psychology, Meredith Miller: httDs://www.bitchute.com/video/CATXk9Dry80o/) of those who, like myself, had many justifiable reservations about the safety of the mRNA/gene therapy platform being used as “vaccines”; - Securing vaccine supply deals: there was NO transparency, secret deals were done, pharma go’s given indemnity, how many tax payer dollars were spent on injections and what are the kickbacks for those making these decisions? We all know there is a revolving door between regulators and Big Pharma. - Addressing labour shortages: mandated injections (scientifically fraudulently justified as the shots did not prevent infection or transmission) meant many workers were sacked; most of these people were not ever reinstated (revenge for disobedience?) but rather workers imported; - The global experience and lessons learnt from other countries in order to improve response measures “in the event of future global pandemics”: excess deaths are still being ignored around the world; our Australian Senate voted against an inquiry into Australian excess deaths; WHO is about to take full control via the amendments to IHR and pandemic treaty, so that in their “future pandemics” our sovereignty will amount to nothing and we will all be at the mercy of whatever madness the WHO dictates. More terms of reference from my list: - WHO declaration of “pandemic” amounts to a dictatorship by one man who heads up an unelected group with huge financial conflicts of interest due to funding asymmetries; we saw this clearly in the Monkeypox fiasco; - Previous pandemic planning over decades was thrown out in 2020 - how and why and who was behind this? If it was a military run biosecurity emergency rollout of countermeasures, why was it masquerading as a public-health-regulated-by-TGA rollout? - PCR tests have been shown to be totally inappropriate as a diagnostic tool; not only do they produce false positives when run at the commonly used but ridiculous 40-cycles, but they could easily have been picking up homologies with previous coronaviruses; Dr Sona Pekova, Czech Republic, Day 3 Nuremberg 2.0: httDs://zeeemedia.com/interview/grand-jury-day-3- pcr-test/ (Please note: if you look at a link and straight away judge it to be “conspiracy” without actually hearing the expert testimony, then you have succumbed to a very efficient Psychological Operation - think about it: if you were trying to tell the truth about something which governments were censoring, wouldn’t you go to “underground” media too, because no one else would allow you to speak? If you really are conducting an Inquiry, you won’t put expert testimonies in the bin before even listening to them.) - Censorship of scientists and doctors who critiqued the responses - MSM and social media tech giants obeyed government dictates to censor and propagandise the government message; httDs://blog.rebekahbarnett.com.au/D/breaking-the-australian-government colluded with big tech to suppress speech on Covid; Canadian testimony by Rodney Palmer Full interview Day 1 Toronto on media propaganda: httDs://nationalcitizensinquiry.ca/toronto-cliDs/: Marianne Klowak’s testimony on CBC, National Citizen’s Inquiry: https://rumble.com/v2ojxea- former-veteran-cbc-reporter-testified-that-the-broadcaster-betrayed-the-pub.html: - AHPRA went after doctors and psychologists who practiced individualised medicine, gave honest opinions of risk/benefit, prescribed safe early treatments, warned against harms of injections, supported the Nuremberg Code (Nuremberg Code: https://media.tghn.org/ medialibrary/2011/04/BMJ No 7070 Volume 313 The Nuremberg Code.pdf). Helsinki Declaration and their own doctors code of conduct regarding informed consent; - Gaslighting by the medical profession, politicians, media, of the people injured after the transfection injections; obvious to anyone paying attention. Even Dr Keryn Phelps! “The panel will consider material from other relevant reviews and inquiries into COVID-19, including submissions and evidence where publicly available”: My list of some of many inquiries (involving expert testimonies) which have already taken place and should be consulted by this inquiry: Australia: https://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/the-covid-inquirv-2-0/ https://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/covid-under-question-a-cross-party-inquiry/ (NB. Dismissing expert testimony just because you don’t like Senator Roberts is not “inquiring”) Canada: http://nationalcitizensinquiry.ca European Parliament: International Covid Summit 3 https://www.internationalcovidsummit.com/media parts 1,2 and 3 Romanian crisis/covid summit: https://www.internationalcovidsummit.com/ Doctors for Covid Ethics Symposium: https://doctors4covidethics.org/gold-standard-covid- science-in-practice-an-interdisciplinary-symposium-v-in-the-midst-of-darkness-light-prevails/ New Zealand Doctors: Medical and government malfeasance: NZ: https://nzdsos.com/ 2023/05/19/complete-disreqard-for-bill-of-riqhts/ Testimonies from the Vaccine Injured: The vile suggestion that such testimonies are from people who misattribute their injuries to the impeccable “Safe&Effective-vaccines ” is insulting to people’s intelligence and unacceptable, especially given the number of people who report such injuries. Given the social ostracising of families and individuals who have spoken up about such injuries, I would think it highly likely that these testimonies are a small fraction of the real toll. Israel: The Testimonies Project: https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/multimedia/avital-livny-the- testimonies-project/ Australia: Forest of the Fallen https://theforestofthefallen.com/about-us/ https://au.jabinjuriesglobal.com USA: Iatrogenesis victims (hospital protocols, mandates, jabs, dead & injured): https://chbmp.org/ cases/ My personal experience of friends injured by the injections: truth in science comes in many forms, although the RCT-hegemony of late has brainwashed some into believing these are the only valid form of evidence; having taught research methodology I know that there are many valid ways in which scientists gather evidence, and these even include anecdotes and personal testimonies. I have already mentioned the young man whose heart has been severely affected, so much so that he was suicidal. He was gaslit by many doctors at first, until the evidence was undeniable. He is still undergoing a slow recovery. In addition, one of my close friends was injured in 2021 by her first AstraZeneca injection - she had a severe immune response affecting her skin and other areas, but her doctors gaslit her to the extent that they refused to give her an exemption for a second jab; outrageously they then suggested she get the mRNA jabs; fortunately she has not had any more since that first one and I am extremely grateful, having monitored the inadequate but still alarming TGA adverse events reports. Dear Inquirer: I am extremely grateful that despite the lies, cover ups and media propaganda, there have been ethical doctors, scientists, psychologists, lawyers and journalists, some of whom I know personally, who have been prepared to sacrifice their careers/reputations to tell the truth. If those on this inquiry are half as ethical and brave, and actually read submissions like mine rather than binning them, Australia is not entirely lost. Sincerely, Dr Rosemary Faire, PhD ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0163 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0164 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0164.pdf I would like to give a few details about my own experience related to the vaccines. I lost my job due to the mandatory requirements. I asked several doctors for an exemption due to ill health and religious reasons. No doctor would grant me an exemption. My employer would not grant me leave without pay and I never got my job back. When the mRNA vaccines became available, I did some research into published scientific papers and was shocked to find that every single paper recommended further research was needed to establish safety. I rang the then ‘Hotline’ to ask several questions about the vaccine, such as when it left the body, however, none of my queries were able to be answered, not even by the doctors. I then learned how to use the VAERS database to run queries. I could not believe the number and nature of serious injuries and death as a result of the mRNA vaccines. I spoke to my doctor about vaccine related harms, but he didn’t know about the VAERS system and was adamant that the vaccines were “safe and effective”. How we now know this is untrue. There is mounting evidence of covid vaccine harm, yet governments continue to push more covid injections. This is madness and must be addressed immediately. Insurance analyst says 600,000 Americans per year are dying from Covid shots https://www.technocracy.news/shock-top-insurance-analyst-says-600000-americans-per- year-are-dying-from-covid-shots/ Cover up and media propaganda has killed millions https://expose- news.com/2023/06/21/cover-up-and-media-propaganda-has-killed-millions/ Covid-19 Countermeasures: Evidence for an intent to harm_https://rumble.com/v289h2g- sasha-latypova-covid-19-countermeasures-evidence-of-the-intent-to-harm.html It appears that governments around the world are in lockstep, choosing to remain blind to genuine scientific evidence of massive vaccine harm, just as they are choosing to remain wilfully ignorant to authentic evidence showing a corporate takeover of the world that is entangled with the vaccine rollout. The fact that there is an elaborate conspiracy against the people of the world can no longer be denied. Multiple UN and WEE documents revealing this agenda are readily available. The evidence below shows the sinister aim to convert the human body into some sort of transmitter of data for the establishment of a new asset class. Multiple patents are also available for this. WEE Internet of Bodies Briefing Paper https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF loB briefing paper 2020.pdf Personal Data: The Emergence of a New Asset Class https://www.weforum.org/reports/personal-data-emergence-new-asset-class/ WEE Transhumanism Compilation https://www.bitchute.eom/video/e 1 LHr6SJI2U1/ Synthetic virus digitizes DNA - EMF links humans to 5G https://odvsee.eom/@pavchoNWO:0/svnthetic-virus-digitizes-dna-emf-links:f It is clear to the people that global powers have conspired to control us. This agenda is no longer theory. We have been severely deceived, and we realise this is painful to admit. Yet this admission is essential if we want to end the road to ruin. Open Mind Conference: Behind the Green Mask - UN Agenda 21 - Rosa Koire https://rumble.com/v28vcla-behind-the-green-mask-un-agenda-21-rosa-koire-open-mind- ifer :e-2013-ska 1 Impact slavery https://winteroak.org.uk/impact-slaverv/ Far too many crimes were committed. We can never again mandate another medical treatment, and for this reason we must oppose the WHO pandemic treaty and IHR amendments. Media must not censor debate or label opposing experts’ views as “conspiracy theories”. Doctors must be able to have individual patient relationships. Vaccine manufacturers must not do secret deals with government and have liability immunity. All mRNA experimentation must be aborted. Gene experimentation is unethical and nobody has the right to play with the code of life. This includes shutting down CSIRO synthetic biology applications that are being fast-tracked on our food, human health and agriculture. There must be a royal commission into the Covid-19 response. In fact, I would like to see a Nuremburg 2 on this matter. We must break the illusions we are under, or we stand to lose everything. Our homes, our family, our farms, our health, our rights, our liberty, our country, our humanity, our truth, our God. We must not tread this path a moment longer. Exit the UN, the WEF and the WHO immediately. Digital ID: UN SDG 16 https://rumble.com/v31otwk-digital-id-unsdg-16.html Absolute slavery: Zero Carbon Agenda deconstructed https://odvsee.eom/@iceagefarmer:42/absolute-slaverv-zero-carbon-agenda:b AI Apocalypse: UNI00/Agenda 2045 https://rumble.com/v3eo39t-uncensored-ai-apocalypse- unl00agcnda-2045-cxposcd.html Climate Change Propaganda in Schools & Climate change anxiety among children (Start at 2 mins) https://rumble.com/v2glg3s-climate-change-and-smart-cities-with-tom-harris.html The Great Global Warming Swindle https://rumble.com/v2k6kbe-the-great-global-warming- swindle-full-documentary-hd.html Frankenskies https://rumble.com/v2cwj5o-documentary-frankenskies-by-actual-activists- A sile war-de jm-a.html The Fact Checking files https://www.bitchute.com/video/ONqhbOrUj-c/ Mass psychosis - How an entire population becomes mentally ill https://rumble.com/voOdwu- mass-psychosis-how-an-entire-population-becomes-mentally-ill.html Ericsson report: Consumer trends - Climate change impacting consumers https://www.ericsson.com/en/reports-and-papers/consumerlab/reports/10-hot-consumer- trends-climate-change-impacting-consumers 6G - Connecting a Cyber-Physical World White Paper https://www.ericsson.com/en/reports- and-papers/white-papers/a-research-outlook-towards-6g Our coming digital prison https://rumble.com/v2baro6-our-coming-digital-prison-with-aman- jabbi.html The Final Lockdown - Smart Cities, CBDCs and Digital ID https://rumble.com/vlwlfcn- aman-jabbi-the-final-lockdown-street-lights-that-kill-in-smart-cities-cbdc-.html Laura Aboli ‘Transhumanism: The End Game’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=FCh6auCKYS0&t=ls UN/WEF Supported by Our Treasonous ‘Governments’- FOI Evidence! https://www.justonefocus.org/explosive-un-wef-actively-supported-by-our-treasonous- govemments-foi-documents-prove/ It is the midnight hour and only truth can save us from further experimentation on people and totalitarian technocratic horrors. We say NO MORE. You must stop the rollout of Digital IDs, CBDCs, biometric mass surveillance, 5G, smart cities, climate change hysteria, corporate propaganda and medical tyranny. The alternative is unimaginable. Yours sincerely Anonymous ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0164 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0165 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0165.pdf Email: 8 December 2023 Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry To Whom It May Concern I write to express my deep concern over the COVID-19 response by the Australian government, and the NSW State Government. The following is a summary of the unacceptable approach by State and Federal governments: • No alternative methods of treatment were promoted. It is well known that having a strong immune system is the best defence against sickness, with high dose vitamin C and zinc the place to start. Ivermectin also is a known covid treatment. Why were these methods of treatment silenced!? • Instead there was just one narrative which was 'get vaccinated'. The unvaccinated were considered 'second class citizens' and that is an appalling way to treat a citizen who is merely exercising bodily autonomy not to get vaccinated. • There was no informed consent provided by government or GPs, as to the potential impacts or side effects of covid vaccinations. It was still in the experimental stage of development, and should not have been rolled out the way it was without further testing and approval. • GPs were bullied into silence at threat of having their registration stripped from them. What happened to their oath to 'do no harm' when it comes to enforcing an experimental vaccination program?! • APHRA and ATAGI censored doctors from speaking out if they did have the courage to do so. As an Australian citizen, I submit that alternatives must be provided in any future pandemics in order to give citizens informed consent, bodily autonomy and alternative treatments! The Australian government must do better! The governments' response is utterly unacceptable. A Royal Commission should be held, rather than a mere government Inquiry. The truth must come out about the illegal vaccine mandates, alleged secret contracts with vaccine manufacturers. Yours sincerely ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0165 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0166 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0166.pdf Call for submissions and evidence to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry I am requesting a proper Royal Commission for a proper investigation into all aspects of the covid 19 fiasco. • Corrupt vaccine procurement • Secret contracts • Mask mandates • Lock downs • Vaccine mandates • Official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission • Vaccine injuries • Media censorship • Silencing of doctors • The role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors • The poor treatment of victims. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0166 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0167 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0167.pdf My name is Xin Yin Ooi, I represent myself as an Australian citizen. Firstly, I want to say to our Prime Minister, that we need a proper Royal Commission to look into the Covid response, not just an Inquiry. This topic is too big for an ordinary government inquiry. We need a Royal Commission with sufficient authority to look into everything that went wrong during the Covid years. Next, I would like to share my own views and experience. I think the single biggest stuff up in our Federal Government's Covid Response, is the brokerage by the then Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, to effectively coordinate his National Cabinet members to implement the Covid vaccination mandates throughout the country. If the Federal Government tries to argue that the vaccination mandates had nothing to do with the Federal Government, this will be seen as a lie. As most of us can recall, the "safe and effective" messaging came from the Federal Government. The state governments have relied on the advice (and advocacy) from the Federal Government to do everything possible to increase vaccination rates, including by making it hard for the people's living without getting the vaccines. We can't visit our dying relatives in hospitals without getting the vaccines. We can't work for a living without getting the vaccines. University students can't get back to face-to-face learning without getting the vaccines. How wrong was all that, considering the benefit of hindsight that we all have now? It is now abundantly clear, that the Covid vaccines are neither safe nor effective. It has not stopped transmission, it has not stopped hospitalisation and deaths. And it has an uncanny temporal correlation with the excess deaths that are observed shortly after the nationwide rollout of the Covid vaccines. The omnipresent vaccine mandates in the years of 2021 and 2022 had resulted in loss of livelihood by many people. I personally was affected by the mandate, my job and livelihood were threatened, only because I was hesitant about receiving a vaccine that was only provisionally approved, had no long-term safety data, was clearly not preventing transmission, for a disease that I have a very high chance of surviving (>99%). The Federal Government has led by example by imposing vaccination mandates on frontline workers, aged care workers, travellers etc. The state governments were apparently just following suit, including through the National Cabinet meetings. It is as clear as day that the vaccination mandates came from the Federal Government, as the trend of mandating did start from there. So what are the lessons learnt? We are almost at the end of 2023, yet Covid-19 is still with us. Apparently we are on track to our "8th wave" of Covid, despite >95% of the population having received at least 2 doses of the Covid vaccination. The mass vaccination program is the single biggest failure of the Federal Government's Covid response. When the next pandemic hits, let's not experiment with something new on the population, shall we? Xin Yin Ooi 08 December 2023 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0167 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0168 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0168.pdf Submission to Commonwealth Government COVIC-19 Response Inquiry I call for a Royal Commission in the pandemic response at state and federal levels. Abandoning the already established protocols from a previous government was a decision that needs to be clarified and made public. Mandating vaccinations and lockdowns and politicising the police force needs to be investigated and repudiated. Only the truth will set us free. Do not set up a whitewashing "inquiry" panel that is run by the same people who orchestrated this governance debacle. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0168 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0169 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0169.pdf Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission and share my views and experiences about the Government’s COVID-19 response. My name is Kerri Thomson. I am a clinical nurse for WA health, and have worked in the health system for over 30 years. I recognise the importance of an effective and resilient PPE supply chain specifically within the Australian manufacturing industry. I would like to see the Australian Government pioneering the development of next generation PPE that gives frontline workers like myself the confidence to come to work during pandemics worse than covid. I would also like to see the development of new standards and regulations surrounding indoor air quality, and preventing close proximity transmission and spread of airborne pathogens that jeopardise vulnerable communities. My key message is the overriding importance of efforts to prevent future pandemics. Perhaps more than any other kind of catastrophic risk, it’s within our power to prevent novel pathogens from emerging and to quickly identify, contain and eliminate them if they do. Given the enormity of human and economic costs of pandemics - and that pandemics much worse than COVID-19 are possible - prevention should be our primary goal. I think preventing pathogens from emerging and controlling them if they do should be top priorities for the new Australian Centre for Disease Control. Bernstein et al make the economic case for this in their paper “The costs and benefits of primary prevention of zoonotic pandemics”. They show that, even on pessimistic assumptions and without considering the potential impact of promising emerging technologies, significant investment in pandemic prevention is overwhelmingly justified. My comments go primarily to ‘preventive health measures’ in terms of reference 3. The costs and benefits of primary prevention of zoonotic pandemics - PMC (nih.gov) Indoor Air Quality Standards I believe that the Australian government should create clear codes of practice and standards for Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) and introduce regulations for high-risk spaces. Every year, Australians fall ill as a result of exposure to airborne pathogens in indoor environments. Some of the most vulnerable members of our community, the elderly and immunocompromised, are particularly exposed to this risk. Better controls on IAQ would not only help protect us against current and future pandemics, but they can also reduce the negative health outcomes caused by other hazards like indoor smog, toxic materials, non­ pandemic respiratory diseases, and other known airborne health hazards. Despite Australians spending at least 90% >f their time ind ors, the Australian Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water highlights that Australia has no specific controls on IAQ aside from the limited control specified by Work Safe Australia. Without nationalised standards and codes specifying minimum performance requirements for infection control, I worry that the nation will default to ineffective interventions that provide little protection against pathogens. Clear and effective codes of practice and standards for IAQ Australia would provide clear metrics and targets for air quality with the goal to reduce pathogen transmission. Without clear metrics and targets, I worry that manufacturers and innovators will create products that are ineffective at cleaning indoor air to suitable levels to reduce pathogen transmission. Evidence-based standards for IAQ which are informed by the latest scientific research into respiratory disease, air filtration and sanitation, public health, and behavioural science would provide the correct regulatory environment to ensure effective IAQ interventions are available to the Australian public. Additionally, clear requirements should be specified for high-risk environments in which airborne infections are potentially life threatening such as in aged care facilities, hospitals, healthcare facilities, and other facilities caring for the immunocompromised. The Lancet COVID-19 Commission Task Force has prop sed Non-infectious Air Delivery Rates (NADR) so we now have measurable goals for ventilation and filtration targets that protect against infectious disease transmission. The Task Force highlights that, while there is ongoing scientific debate over what metrics and targets are optimal, there is agreement that current practices are insufficient. I recommend that the Inquiry read the report to gain a better understanding of the considerations in setting effective codes and standards for IAQ IAQ codes and standards could be defined by the Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB) in the National Construction Code. The ABCB could draw on the expertise of the Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care and the Australasian Health Infrastructure Alliance (AHIA), as well as the existing IAQ work done by the ABCB. AS HR. E Standat 241, Control of Infectious Aerosols may also be helpful in informing codes and standards. I believe that clearer codes of practice and standards for IAQ can help safeguard all Australians against airborne pathogens in indoor environments. With the right regulatory environment we can reduce the spread of pathogens, reduce the burden on our public health system, and safeguard the most vulnerable members of our community. Supply chains and next generation PPE The terms of reference refer to support for industry and business, including in responding to supply chain, transport and labour shortage issues. No doubt, when hearing evidence on this topic, the Inquiry will receive submissions from the industry which boil down to seeking additional government support. While I think it is right that the Inquiry turns its mind to supporting industry and business - I would encourage the inquiry to do that through the lens of the public interest. Specifically, in a future pandemic worse than COVID-19, what is it that the public needs from industry and how can the Inquiry’s recommendations ensure we are in a position to receive it? We know that, during critical stages of the pandemic, Australia had difficulty acquiring adequate vaccines, PPE and rapid antigen tests. A lack of reagents also inhibited testing in the early stages of the pandemic. In a future worse pandemic, it might be that supply chain breakdowns and labour force shortages lead to far worse consequences. Although COVID was challenging, there was never a suggestion that the power might go out or that food would not be available. But COVID did show us just how brittle modern “just in time” supply chains can be. If what happened to toilet paper instead happened to food, medication or liquid fuel, the consequences could be catastrophic. Similarly, if the workforce shortages that hit the meat industry instead hit the power grid operators, the consequences could be societal collapse. Overall, there’s a sense in which modern society is far more brittle than historical societies that endured pandemics. In a modern society, our lives depend on interactions with people hundreds or thousands of kilometres away who we have never met. This has never been the case historically. This observation leads to two conclusions: First, the importance of pandemic prevention is paramount. If a pandemic could plausibly cause complete social collapse, it’s essential that we identify all the vectors by which pandemics could begin and work hard domestically and globally to address them. Second, in the event that such a pandemic does occur, we can’t be in the position of having to solve problems like defining essential workers or mapping supply chains on the fly through ad hoc approaches like the National Coordination Mechanism. Instead, we need to have a robust national plan for a pandemic worse than COVID that is regularly exercised with industry and civil society organisations as well as international partners. Exactly where the pressure points are will change rapidly, and the lessons we learned from COVID are unlikely to remain true in 10 or 30 years from now. Only robust planning and regular exercising will ensure we maintain and build the knowledge necessary for the future. Conclusion The notable public health challenges of history have been solved by innovative people bringing new ideas and perspectives to the challenge of health. As the scope of public health has grown, so has its ability to improve longevity and quality of life. The terms of reference of this inquiry are fundamentally about doing better in the future. Given how terrible future pandemics could be - the best thing the Inquiry could do for the future is to prioritise pandemic prevention, including the novel ways pandemics could occur in the future. While that will require uncomfortable thinking about unexpected topics and emerging technologies, these are the issues that could have the biggest impact towards securing a healthier future. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0169 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0170 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0170.pdf i. DEMAND a royal commission »o< a FULL W investigation! fl 2 EXPOSE ■ corrupt vaccine acquisitions and SECRET ■ contracts with Vaccine manufacturers* 3 Illegal vaccine mandates! I 4. Official misinformation about vaccines blocking■ transmission! fl 5 Vaccine injuries’ fl 6 Silencing of doctors and experts! 7 AHPRA and ATAGI'S censorship of doctors! ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0170 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0172 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0172.pdf Below are complied a series of links to well documented sources and highly qualified individuals. Personally, I am greatly dissatisfied with the government, both state and federal, handling of the global pandemic COVID 19. I am of the firm belief that the proper protocols for pandemic response were either completely ignored out of grave ignorance or wilful and deliberate malfeasance. The disgraceful act of preventing access to a non-mRNA vaccine developed by Vaxine Pty Ltd based at Flinders University I believe borders on criminal negligence, particularly given that the Chief Health Officer in South Australia, Ms Nicola Spurrier would have been a colleague of that same institution. Given that alternatives to mRNA vaccination were clearly available at the time of the TGA giving regulatory approval for mRNA "vaccines," a yet hitherto time (ref: Document photo below; Nov 2021) untried technology, is in my opinion nothing other than gross negligence. The lack of follow up and ignoring of belated release of Pfizer documentation which highlight gross anomalies in testing and data extraction is completely mystifying? Informed consent not followed in Australia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sR-NYrYyEls Improper use of PCR testing for detection of COVID 19 https://www.youtube.com/shorts/SmVjtTFmdl8 Aspiration not encouraged or supported by mass vaccination program in Australia. https://www.voutube.com/watch?v=WuvAtvwP2H4 https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=Fxlug6klmso Reported excess deaths in Australia after COVID 19 vaccination program. URGENT ENQUIRY REQUIRED!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3vY2LyQnlA Masking requirements were a waste of time and were cause of increased risk of disease. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuZ7-J7d0jk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcC 2V-5zfU The damage of the pandemic response, and ineffectiveness of lockdown. yaxme 29lh November 2021 Martin Hahnheuser Campbelltown, South Australia This letter certifies that Martin Hahnheuser has registered to ‘ake Parl in a Planncd c,inical lrial of a Covid' 19 vaccine known as Covax-19 or Spikogen developed by Vaxine Ply Ltd. This recombinant protein vaccine has been proven to be effective against infection with the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant in Phase 3 clinical trials conducted overseas. Based on these results this vaccine has been granted emergency use authorization by the Iranian FDA and as part of plans to register the vaccine in Australia, Vaxine Pty Ltd is currently arranging a clinic;d trial to assess the impact of varying the interval between the two vaccine doses on its effectiveness. In order to preserve the integrity of the clinical trial, it is an enrolment criterion that you be Covid-19 vaccine naive at the time of your entry into the trial. Hence receipt of any other Covid-19 vaccine is a key trial exclusion criteria. It is also critical for the scientific integrity of the trial that you agree not to receive any other Covid-19 vaccine during the conduct of the trial. Under the revised South Australian Emergency Management Vaccination Direction 2021, being a participant in a Covid-19 vaccine trial is now an accepted exclusion criterion. ,___ u •___ . * — "Different rules apply"to' vaccine mandates in each Statel so ifyou do not live in South Australia you will need to check with your State Health Department to find out if being a participant in a Covid-19 vaccine Inal is an accepted exclusion criterion for the relevant State mandate. The Trial will require you to have two doses of Covax-19/Spikogen vaccine at intervals varying from 3 to 12 weeks apart depending on which group you are randomized into. There is no placebo in this trial, so everyone will receive the active Covax-19/Spikogen vaccine. We will be doing our best to try and organize Trial sites in each State, but at this stage cannot confirm the time of trial commencement, trial sites or participant eligibility, as this will first necessitate relevant regulatory approvals to be received. We will be in touch with more information as soon as we can. Yours sincerely Clinical Trials Manager Vaxine Pty Ltd • ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0172 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0173 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0173.pdf In December 2020 the following facts were known about Covid-19 without a reasonable doubt: • The infection fatality rate (IFR) for the entire population was less than 1%. • The IFR for anyone under 55 was 0.01% or lower. • The IFR for children was near zero With this information available how on earth could the government's response be justified- medically,economically and socially there was no need for emergency lockdowns which prevented families being with loved ones. Closures of schools and mask wearing had no scientific benefit and the issue of no informed consent in relation to vaccine mandates needs to be investigated People died due to the false advertising of safe and effective and those who suffered injuries need to be supported. The government and its advisers got it wrong! ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0173 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0176 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0176.pdf My name is and I joined the NSW Police Force in January 2015, attaining the rank of Senior Constable at the earliest possible time by ensuring completion all the necessary requirements to a exemplary standard. Prior to joining the NSW Police Force, I received all recommended vaccinations, including hepatitis B and tetanus along with voluntary vaccinations like influenza. During m^^^^^^/vith the NSW police force, I was never disciplined or subject to any form of managerial action. In fact, I was praised for my work ethic and commitment, reflected by positive character references from my superiors, certificates, awards and complimentary remarks that I received throughout my career. This information can be found in my individual profile in the Commissioners Confidence Supporting Documents, Annexure 10 of my evidence bundle. This document demonstrates that I have never been subject to any form of management action. I thoroughly enjoyed my time working for the NSW Police and it was a career that I envisioned would take me through to retirement. Some of my best friends and family still work for the NSW Police Force. None of those friends and family are concerned about my covid vaccination status and they were never fearful to be in my presence. In 2020 and 2021, I was deployed by the NSW police to work on Operation Coronavirus. This involved working at the quarantine hotels, international and domestic airports and the Victoria/NSW border. I was also required to conduct welfare checks on covid positive patients within the North Shore PAC. All tasks had the potential risk of coming into contact with covid positive patients. I have always complied with the covid 19 protection guidelines ensuring that I wore the essential PPE and safety equipment, including masks and gloves and followed the necessary risk mitigation. This information is outlined in my show cause notice Annexure 9 of my evidence bundle. On 6th of August 2021, the Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison stated in a public announcement that vaccinations would not be mandatory for Australians. This was reassuring, due to the health concerns that I had. On the 7th of September 2021, the Commissioner of NSW Police announced that all employees must receive their first dose of a covid vaccine by the 30th of September 2021. We were given the opportunity to seek discretion by forwarding a written report outlining our circumstances as to why we should not be required to get vaccinated with the available covid vaccinations. I sought discretion on the grounds that my wife and I got married in April 2021 and were attempting to have a baby. I compiled a report detailing my wife's and my concerns that we did not have enough information about the potential side effects of available covid vaccines, which were and still are only provisionally approved. The lack of information surrounding fertility and other personal concerns were difficult to comprehend, as general practitioners that we saw did not know the answers to our questions and the vaccines were only in their infancy. In addition, there was not enough research or testing conducted by vaccine companies to supply sufficient data on fertility and effects. I also conducted research on Pfizer, Moderna and Astrazeneca websites but was unable to find any information to satisfy our concerns due to the vaccine companies not conducting tests on this and long term safety data currently non existent. Australian Federal Health Minister Greg Hunt stated in February 2021, "The world is engaged in the largest global vaccination trial ever, and we will have enormous amounts of data". This statement was alarming as my wife and I did not wish to participate in a trial with limited data on safety and fertility. My wife and I also monitored the statistics surrounding covid 19 and were confident that we were not at a high risk of becoming seriously ill from contracting the virus due to our age and the fact that we maintain a healthy and active lifestyle, in order to protect ourselves from numerous diseases and conditions. We were also aware that the vaccines were not stopping transmission, so argument to get vaccinated to protect others was therefore redundant. In my godfrey report to the Commissioner of police, I outlined that I witnessed and was aware of side effects that friends, family and colleagues of my wife and I encountered after administering the covid vaccines. Some of our females friends and family experienced changes to their menstrual cycles, an effect confirmed by peer reviewed articles and presented on mainstream media, all of which is included in my brief. Having close family and friends experience side effects was concerning, as I too could encounter the same or different side effects after receiving the vaccination and with no assurances from NSW Police or the numerous general practitioners my wife and I sought advice from the decision to receive one of the available covid vaccinations was not made lightly. I was stood down from the NSW Police Force following the 30th of September 2021. I informed the NSW Police Force that I did not want to be forced to use my own entitlements, as I was ready, willing and able to work. I would wear the necessary PPE gear and offered complete numerous suitable tasks with alternative working arrangements. However, these requests and proposals were rejected and I was forced to use my own leave entitlements. My report seeking discretion was rejected after the date specified by the mandate, on the Sth of October 2021. I attempted to engage the NSW Police in communication on multiple occasions, requesting risk assessments and further information about the vaccines via email with the Superintendent of North Shore Jenny Scholz and North Shore HR. I also sought information on what the proposed managerial action would be if I had not been vaccinated prior to the mandate. However, I was not provided with any of the information requested. The email history is included on Annexure 5 of my evidence bundle. I contacted the Police Association prior to and after the 30th of September 2021. They were unable to confirm whether or not a risk assessment regarding the safety of the available covid vaccinations or regarding the necessity for a vaccination to complete police work was available. On the Sth of October 2021, a representative from the police association informed me via email that the direction to get vaccinated was "likely to be lawful" as determined by a meeting held with their senior legal counsel. The lack of confidence in this response was not reassuring. This email history is in Annexure 8 of my evidence bundle. (Page 25 of 32) There was not adequate consultation between the Police commissioner, my superiors or myself prior to the mandate. This situation was completely unexpected and I myself felt blindsided by the mandate to get vaccinated or be stood down. I was stood down for over 5 months before being terminated. During that time, the NSWPF did not make any attempt to check on my mental wellbeing nor have any negotiations or compromises taken place. As far as I am concerned, I was treated like a criminal and disowned from the so called blue family. I am thankful for the friends that remained working for the police force that continued to contact me on a regular basis to check how my family were coping. Unfortunately the same care and compassion has not been shown by the NSW Police organisation or the commissioner. On the 12th of November 2021,1 received my Show Cause Notice. I contacted the Police Association and requested assistance with my response. My Police association appointed legal representative submitted my response along with character references from my superior officers on the 3rd of December 2021. On the 23rd of January 2022,1 contracted covid 19. This was verified by a rapid Antigen Test and a PCR test. Subsequently, the PCR test was registered with NSW Health. I notified North Shore Police HR and forwarded the certificate along with an automated 6 week exemption from NSW Health. The symptoms that I encountered were mild and I was uncomfortable for approximately 48 hours. However, the symptoms that I experienced were no worse than an ordinary cold or flu that I had encountered during my lifetime. After my isolation period, I attended a GP in Elanora Medical Centre where I obtained a 4 month exemption in accordance with the current advice at the time from ATAGI. The GP also believed that natural immunity from the virus was superior to vaccine immunity. Subsequently, I did not feel the need to get vaccinated. On the 29th of January 2022, my wife conducted a pregnancy test and confirmed that she was pregnant. We were overwhelmed with excitement, however, my unknown employment status, overshadowed this joyful time with stress and anxiety about how I would support my growing family. On the Sth of March 2022, Chief Inspector Mark PLUSS and Acting Superintendant NEWMAN met myself and 2 other colleagues at a cafe in Dee Why. The purpose of the meeting was for those officers to serve us with 181 d notices. During the interaction, we shook hands, sat next to each other, drank coffee without social distancing or protective clothing, masks or gloves. It appeared that the concerns of about the dangers of covid 19 were non existent. From that moment, we were officially terminated from the NSW Police Force, shook hands again and parted ways. I have since been forced to seek employment elsewhere in order to support my family now that my wife is on maternity leave. This has proven to be quite difficult, being a 40 year-old that has been terminated from a law enforcement job for Serious Misconduct. I am unable to apply for a security licence to pursue investigating roles, as the NSW Police Force will not accept applications from Police officers that were terminated or dismissed. In addition several other government jobs that I have applied for including the greyhound welfare Integrity Commission and Liquor and Gaming NSW have similar criteria where they do not accept anyone that has been dismissed or terminated from NSW Police. It is difficult to accept that I have been terminated for integrity issues and deliberately disobeying a commissioners directive as there was nothing deliberate or sinister about my actions. I was and still am genuinely concerned about health reasons that have still not been addressed or clarified and this should not reflect poorly on my character nor should my integrity be questioned. We were taught to investigate in policing and on this occasion, that is what I have done. I conducted my own research into the available covid 19 and the vaccines and attempted to engage with the NSW Police Force to provide me with further information regarding my concerns. I was not satisfied with the lack of data. Furthermore, doctors are not lawfully permitted to vaccinate individuals unless given informed consent. If I was to be vaccinated in order to keep my job, this is not classed as consent and therefore the doctor would not vaccinate me. As mentioned previously, I have never been subject to managerial or disciplinary action in the police force or any other job for that matter. I have not even lost a demerit point during my 23 years of driving a motor vehicle. However, I know of NSW Police Officers that have been charged with drink driving, assault and other serious offences, all of whom have remained in the workplace with minimal disciplinary action. Unfortunately, I have not been provided the same leniency. In fact, I am being punished for being concerned about a decision that may affect my health and the potential to build a family with my wife. Whilst employed as a Police Officer, I was always taught to deal with matters by the least restrictive means. This instance of being terminated appears to be the most restrictive means by terminating me for serious misconduct and questioning my integrity, restricting my ability to apply for and attain employment and licenses. More recently, I discovered that numerous doctors felt that they were compromised and unable to speak negatively about the available covid vaccines. This was announced on mainstream media in December 2022 by Kerryn Phelps, the ex­ president of the Australian Medical Association. She stated that her and her wife had serious adverse reactions from the covid vaccines and confirmed that more research needs to be conducted on them. She also stated that doctors felt scared to speak out as the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency was threatening them. I have also located peer reviewed articles validating some of my concerns surrounding potential side effects from the covid vaccines which I included in my statement in evidence bundle. Despite all of this, my wife gave birth to our beautiful baby on the 6th of October 2022 and our world has changed tremendously. We consider ourselves very lucky to be parents and would be devastated if previously taking a provisionally approved medicine affected our chances or the ability to have our beautiful daughter. My primary concerns about the available covid vaccinations were centered around fertility and the lack of data to support their safety. So although these concerns went unanswered by the NSW police my initial report and all endeavors to communicate since have been truthful, reasonable and not worthy of any form of disciplinary action. Finally, I invested a substantial amount of time, effort and money into becoming a police officer. It has been devastating to put approximately $20000 of study fees and almost 7 years experience to waste when I have witnessed officers commit legitimate offences and walk away with their career intact. The dismissal and reasons associated within the 181 d were harsh and unjust and worthy of this unfair dismissal hearing. Especially when my actions did not impact anyone else. The Industrial Relations Commission did not consider my evidence in my Hearing as the commissioner told me that he already made up his mind and confirmed that the mandate was justified. Therefore, it was up to me to explain why I thought the dismissal was harsh. The Commissioner thought that losing my job, potential future employment and my integrity was fair. This decision from him was disgusting and inhumane. Given that there is so much evidence to support that I didn't need the vaccine and my actions did not affect anyone else, I struggle to see how the government allowed this to happen. I have lost a lot of faith in the NSW and Federal governments after the last few years. Hopefully we can mend the relationship and work towards a better and fairer future. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0176 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0177 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0177.pdf I DEMAND a Royal Commission for FULL investigation ! It is needed to gain inside into the corrupt dealings of government officials with the vaccine manufacturers and expose all relevant information about the true incurred cost and future cost. It is needed for the investigation and prosecution of the government officials who imposed onto us unlawful vaccine mandates and caused immense harm to the long term health of many Australians and immense costs to our economy It is needed for the investigation and prosecution of the government officials who were actively engaged in spreading disinformation about the vaccines been effective and safe instead of advising public to be cautious due to the experimental nature of the vaccines and no external quality control. It is needed for the investigation and prosecution of the government officials who were implicated in the suppression of other modalities of Covid treatment - such as the use of Ivermectin, Hydroxichloroquin, Isoprinosine and many others. It is needed for the investigation and prosecution of the government officials implicated in silencing doctors and experts critical of the "official narrative" and offering alternative paths. It is needed for the investigation and prosecution of the government officials It is needed for the investigation and prosecution of the government officials responsible for censorship of doctors through the powers of AHPRA and ATAGI It is needed for the investigation and publicizing of all statistical data available to assist in quantifying the harm the experimental vaccines done and continue to do to Australians. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0177 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0178 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0178.pdf Submission to support enquiry into handling of the COVID 19 crisis in Australia. I am an education officer in special education working across 56 schools in Newcastle. I have worked in the field of special education for 35 years and as a teacher for 46 years. I have a Masters Degree in Special Education. During the pandemic we were told that children were not at high risk of serious illness from the COVID virus but were potential spreaders and possible "granny killers". From the data produced from several sources including the TGA data, we know that healthy children were not at risk of serious health injury from COVID and we also know, and knew in 2021 from esteemed doctors and scientists, that A-symptomatic transmission was baloney. Since the return of students to school in November 2021, after extended periods of lockdown, the impact on student's well-being, mental health, arrested social development and mental health has been immeasurable. The effects on student learning, especially those thousands of students starting school in 2021 and 2022, and young students in the early years of their schooling, is still being dealt with in 2023. I call for and support an enquiry into the handling of the COVID pandemic in Australia so that government and officials will operate, in future, from a place of evidence, truth and integrity. There are hundreds of thousands of children and young people who have had their mental health and education impacted severely. This negative impact will shape society to some extent for generations. Thank you for accepting this submission. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0178 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0179 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0179.pdf Dear Mr Albanese, I am requesting a proper Royal Commission for a proper investigation into the handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. The way this outbreak continues to be managed creates a lot of fear. People have been fed misinformation, data has been manipulated, and it has led to a decline in our society’s mental and physical health. There has been corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts which puts money in big business pockets but doesn’t protect the people of our country. Gene therapy vaccines were pushed into the market without adequate testing and data was manipulated. Australians deserve openness, honesty, and choice regarding their own health decisions. Mask mandates, vaccine mandates, and lockdowns have done more harm than good. Hardworking people lost their jobs and many businesses went bankrupt. The incidence of mental health conditions skyrocketed. These measures should never be forced on Australians again. The media lied to the public that vaccines could block transmission. The push for vaccination wasn’t in the best interests of the public. There are so many people now with vaccine injuries and myocarditis. People were told to wait at home until they were just too sick and so some then lost their lives. What about all the things people should be doing for the first stage of illness? Why wasn’t early onset care pushed in the media? Why was ivermectin hidden when the data showed its effectiveness? Those people who tried to promote these other effective health measures were censored in the media. People who were censored for sharing true information and people who have vaccine injuries should receive an apology and deserve a proper investigation so this never happens again. Doctors were silenced and AHPRA and ATAGI were in on this censorship and oppression of doctors. So many amazing medical professionals lost their jobs which led to hospital staff shortages and overwork for remaining staff. I am a health worker and this whole situation was handled abysmally. Our healthcare system can be amazing but only if managed effectively and throughout the pandemic and beyond it has been totally mismanaged. We need proper plans so this can never happen again. My family is demanding answers that only a Royal Commission can deliver. Regards, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0179 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0181 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0181.pdf I DEMAND a Royal Commission for FULL investigation ! It is needed to gain inside into the corrupt dealings of government officials with the vaccine manufacturers and expose all relevant information about the true incurred cost and future cost. It is needed for the investigation and prosecution of the government officials who imposed onto us unlawful vaccine mandates and caused immense harm to the long term health of many Australians and immense costs to our economy. It is needed for the investigation and prosecution of the government officials who were actively engaged in spreading disinformation about the vaccines been effective and safe instead of advising public to be cautious due to the experimental nature of the vaccines and no external quality control. It is needed for the investigation and prosecution of the government officials who were implicated in the suppression of other modalities of Covid treatment - such as the use of Ivermectin, Hydroxichloroquin, Isoprinosine and many others. It is needed for the investigation and prosecution of the government officials implicated in silencing doctors and experts critical of the "official narrative" and offering alternative paths. It is needed for the investigation and prosecution of the government officials It is needed for the investigation and prosecution of the government officials responsible for censorship of doctors through the powers of AHPRA and ATAGI It is needed for the investigation and publicizing of all statistical data available to assist in quantifying the harm the experimental vaccines done and continue to do to Australians. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0181 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0182 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0182.pdf See note made ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0182 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0184 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0184.pdf COVID-19 Response Inquiry My submission for the Prime Minister and Cabinet in relation to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry is that this measure is not sufficient to fully address the issues and deficiencies of the Australian Government’s actions during this event. I demand a proper Royal Commission to undertake a full and frank investigation into the COVID-19 response. The Royal Commission should investigate and address: - Deliberate misinformation and messaging from the government and bombardment of the public with “fear pom” rather than actual facts Examples: (a) the safety & efficacy of experimental “vaccines”; (b) actual risk to the population from the “virus”; (c) alternate treatment options (d) vaccine injuries - Censorship of information or scientific evidence opposing the “official agenda” leading to biased messaging and stifling of open debate and full and informed decision making Examples: (a) silencing of doctors (b) the role of APHRA and ATAGI in censorship (c) interference with the doctor/patient relationship and the right of full and informed consent - Gross overreach of powers; actions taken without proper scientific evidence or cause and in contravention to the human rights of the people of Australia Examples: (a) unlawful mandates and lockdowns (b) unlawful fines and restrictions (c) corrupt vaccine procurement and secret deals (d) monetary incentives to push an untested and unnecessary medical treatment on the Australian people - Negative impacts to the Australian people from actions taken by the Australian Government Examples: (a) economic impacts (loss of jobs, national debt, inappropriate use of funds of the Australian people) (b) mental health impacts (c) increases in excess mortality rates as a result of mandates, lockdowns, unproven medical interventions ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0184 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0185 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0185.pdf COVID-19 Inquiry To whom it may concern, As this COVID-19 response was one of the most significant events to happen in Australia, and its ramifications and effects on people, business and the economy was so extensive, I feel that it behoves the Government to hold a proper Royal Commission into the COVID-19 response by the Federal Government, National Cabinet, and the disparate responses by the various States. I believe also that the current Government is showing contempt for the Australian public, by only having an inquiry into the COVID-19 response, and putting such a small timeframe for submissions. The following are areas that need to be properly investigated and reported on to give the Australian public any confidence that this inquiry is not just a deliberate white-wash: • Corrupt vaccine procurements, and secret contracts; • Mask mandates • Official misinformation - that the COVID-19 trial drugs were safe & effective; and deliberate blocking of information of those who were offering different medical alternatives; • Lies that these trial vaccines would block transmission - promulgated by both media and government; • Doctor and other medical personnel being gagged and censored by AHPRA & ATAGI; • Human rights being set aside - such as bodily autonomy choices; right to protest; etc. • Role of approval of the trial vaccines by TGA - especially relying solely on FDA approval, when FDA relied on Phizer/Moderna trials without their own testing; • Mandates in various states for a range of industries; • Excess deaths in Australia that have not been investigated; • Vaccine injuries that have occurred, and the lack of true compensation for those affected; • Decisions to implement lockdowns, and their length of time and effects; • Health directives by the relevant authorities and their basis. • Role of police enforcement of heath directives; These are just some of the areas that come to mind that need to be investigated. I urge the inquiry to direct the Government to investigate these areas and more, so that the Australian public will be convinced that lessons from this era in our nation will be learnt and implemented to ensure that the devastation caused by an infection that was only slightly worse than the yearly influenza infections does not repeat itself. Yours sincerely, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0185 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0186 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0186.pdf COVID-19 Inquiry To whom it may concern, I feel that the Government is obligated to hold a proper Royal Commission to thoroughly investigate the response by the Federal Government, National Cabinet, and the various States, to the COVID-19 virus because this was one of the most significant events to happen in Australia, and its consequences and far reaching effects on people, business and the economy was so extensive. Also, I believe that the current Government is showing a lack of respect for the Australian public, by only having an inquiry into the COVID-19 response, and allowing such a limited timeframe for submissions. This inquiry will appear to be just a deliberate white-wash if the following areas are not properly investigated and reported on: • Official misinformation - that the COVID-19 trial injections were safe & effective; and the deliberate blocking of information by eminently qualified medicals professionals who were offering legitimate medical alternatives; • Lies that these trial vaccines would block transmission - spread by both media and government; • Mask mandates and the effectiveness or otherwise of these. • Corrupt vaccine procurements, and secret contracts; One might ask "what is being hidden from the Australian public"? • The invasion of the confidential doctor to patient relationship when AHPRA & ATAGI gagged and censored doctors by threatening them with deregistration if they gave individually appropriate advise to their patients that may not have fit the blanket approach of the government. This cost lives. • Vaccine injuries that have occurred, and the lack of true compensation for those affected; My son was too sick to work for three months after his second vaccine and we still don't know the long term damage done to him. • Fundamental Human rights such as bodily autonomy being set aside, along with the right to protest; etc. • Role of approval of the trial vaccines by TGA - especially relying solely on FDA approval, when FDA relied on Phizer/Moderna trials without their own testing; • Mandates in various states for many industries; • Decisions to implement lockdowns, and their length of time and effects; • The basis of Health directives by the relevant authorities. • Role of police enforcement of those heath directives; • The excess deaths in Australia that have not yet been investigated; A thorough investigation of all these areas, by nothing less than a royal commission, is essential. The Australian public deserve some reassurance that the lessons from this era in our nation will be learnt and implemented to ensure that the 'knock on' devastation (caused by an infection) does not repeat itself. Yours sincerely, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0186 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0188 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0188.pdf As a quick introduction, I’m Justin, a researcher and former public servant with a strong interest in protecting Australia’s economic stability and national security. I have tertiary education and/or research experience in public health, molecular biology and artificial intelligence. I’m also a resident of Melbourne, and was directly affected by various mishaps during the COVID-19 response (e.g. outbreaks from quarantine facilities). “As the Ebola and Zika crises showed, managing pandemics is a global responsibility, but too much planning is still national, and little attention is paid to worst-case scenarios. ” - A 2017 quote from Oxford researcher Sebastian Farquar I’ve long been concerned by such calls from experts for Governments to be more proactive in addressing risks from pandemics. I believe we have been relatively lucky in avoiding catastrophic pandemics - as damaging as COVID-19 turned out to be, it is nevertheless still considered to have been a “dress-rehearsal” for more serious pandemics1. To illustrate this point, the recent pandemic was mild enough that civilian populations were ordered to stay home, and threatened with punishments for not doing so. As experts have warned2, a more serious pandemic would be characterised by essential workers refusing to leave their homes, causing a widespread breakdown of supply chains and essential services - these are the scenarios that the Inquiry must be cognisant of. There are tangible of examples of how this might arise: the H5N1 avian influenza is over 50% lethal in humans3, and mutations that increase its transmissibility (which have been shown in laboratory settings4) would have grave consequences for public safety. Another horror-story example is the naturally occurring Calicivirus in rabbits, with a fatality rate of 90% in adults, and the ability to spread extremely easily through populations, especially because of lower death rates in younger rabbits. I’ve often heard professionals in the biotechnology industry joke that they could bring civilisation to its knees by engineering a super-virus of this kind and releasing it at an airport. The fact that this hasn’t occurred yet is pure luck; the scientifically advanced terrorist group Aum Shinrikyo, active in the 80’s and 90’s, narrowly missed out on having access to the technology necessary to do this. Their best option at the time was to release anthrax aerosols over a large city, or capture a live sample of ebola from Africa - both of which they invested resources into doing. As an Australian citizen, the risk from extreme pandemics is the #1 factor that makes me fear for the safety of myself and of loved ones. It’s also the reason I am very excited about the move to establish the new CDC, and this focus of this inquiry on preventing the next pandemic. Accordingly, there are 3 key priorities that l‘d like to raise for consideration: 1 Early Thoughts on the Pandemic (2020). Sam Harris and Amesh Adalja 2 Gopal et al. Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics 3 Situation Report: Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A(H5N1) (2023). National Emerging Special Pathogens Training and Education Center 4 Fouchier study reveals changes enabling airborne spread ofH5N1. (2012) University of Minnesota Priority 1: Detection of novel pathogens with pandemic potential The CDC should prioritise research into the most scalable and targeted methods for assessing novel pathogens in circulation, including methods such metagenomics (both clinical and wastewater), CRISPR-based diagnostics, and improvements to and multiplexing of PCR and LAMP. In particular, monitoring the wastewater of international arrival aeroplanes is considered to be a low-hanging opportunity for detecting novel pathogens. The inquiry should also take into consideration the analysis undertaken by the Geneva Centre for Security Policy, titled “Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics"5. The authors highlight the realistic dangers from “stealth pandemics” - those arising from highly virulent pathogens whose worst effects become present after a significant delay. For any advanced terrorist group that wishes to inflict atrocious casualties on an enemy, a pathogen of this kind is the best option. Currently, there is no systematic process for detecting this kind of threat; with the cost of biotechnology tools decreasing rapidly, we need to begin deploying these capabilities defensively in order to counteract potential offensive uses. Australian biosecurity researcher Chelsea Liang outlined some of the relevant policy considerations for implementing this kind of a monitoring program6. It goes without saying that these early detection systems wouldn’t be exclusively useful for engineered pandemics - they would also assist in responding to other sources of pandemics, such a zoonotic transmission or laboratory leaks. Relatively small-scale programs were shown to be effective in the later stages of the COVID-pandemic7. Priority 2: Development and deployment of far-UVC light for indoor quality I’m sure the Inquiry will already be aware of the rationale behind far-UVC light (it’s ability to inactivate airborne pathogens but leave humans unharmed) - as a formality I will provide a relevant citation if further background reading is desirable8. Suffice to say, there is a significant opportunity to reduce air-born transmission of pathogens by mandating the deployment of far-UVC lighting in high-risk indoor settings. With current technology, this isn’t yet cost-effective, but with additional R&D investment this may become our best line of defence against the spread of infectious diseases. 5 https://www.gcsp.ch/publications/securing-civilisation-against-catastrophic-pandemics 6 Managing the Transition to Widespread Metagenomic Monitoring: Policy Considerations for Future Biosurveillance, Health Security. (2023) Chelsea Liang et al. 7 Wegryzyn et al (2022) Early Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Variants Using Traveler-based Genomic Surveillance at 4 US Airports, September 2021-January 2022, Clinical Infectious Diseases 8 Far-UVC (222 nm) efficiently inactivates an airborne pathogen in a room-sized chamber. (2022) Eadie et al. As a matter of priority, the Australian Government should be investigating ways to support R&D in far-UVC-lighting, and the CDC should begin drafting a strategy for it being rolled-iout across Australia in anticipation of it becoming a scalable solution. • As pointed out in the Terms of Reference, at-risk populations are an important consideration during pandemics, and these devices should be installed ASAP in settings as hospitals and nursing homes. • In the medium term, there will be benefits to economic security by installing them in transmission sites such as public transport, schools, and airports. • As a long-term strategy, building codes should incorporate requirements for installation of far UVC lighting; Governments should also incentivise workplaces to install them by reimbursing a proportion of the costs (this is relevant to the ToR point of “Support for industry and businesses”). Priority 3: Take measures to protect critical infrastructure workers during pandemics The Inquiry should familiarise itself with a paper called “Electric Power Grids Under High- Absenteeism Pandemics: History, Context, Response, and Opportunities” (Wormuth et al.), which explains how the energy sector is the critical failure-point for interdependent essential services, such as water systems, communication networks, transportation systems and health services9. The paper points out that COVID-19 was unlike many other historic pandemics because a majority of deaths occurred in people over 65, while the majority of employees essential to the continued operation of the power grid are under 65. An extreme pandemic that affects working-age civilians could precipitate cascading failures of critical infrastructure; this risk is a feature of our modern infrastructure, which is highly optimised for efficiency and therefore extremely brittle. For the inquiry to succeed in addressing Terms of Reference one, two and six, it must secure Australia against this challenge. In terms of solutions, both Wormuth et al. and Gopal et al. advise that power generators, transmission providers and distribution providers should have the capability to provide high- quality PRE to their workers during a crisis. Experts recommend that powered air-purifying respirators with HEPA filters should be required - asking critical infrastructure workers to leave their homes during a >20% fatality pandemic with an inferior level of protection would be wishful thinking. Conclusion: I believe that if this Inquiry makes the right recommendations, Australia will be a safer, more prosperous place for generations to come. Investments that improve indoor air quality will reduce the baseline level of transmission, giving society a better chance to “keep the lights on” during mild pandemics such as COVID. Early detection will allow us to respond more quickly and with greater confidence; and next­ 9 Electric Power Grids Under High-Absenteeism Pandemics: History, Context, Response, and Opportunities generation PPE in critical infrastructure will ensure that even in the worst case scenarios, Australia will be able to sustain itself and bounce back. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0188 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0189 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0189.pdf To the Attorney General of Australia, I am an Australian Citizen, living in Melbourne Victoria, who seeks protection under my absolute and non-derogable right under article 4(2) of the ICCPR freedom from medical or scientific experimentation without consent (art 7) (which, as stated in the Australian Government Attorney General's Department) cannot be suspended even in a state of emergency. I do not consent to be involved in a COVID-19 vaccination program which involves the use of a vaccine that are still experimental and have not been approved. I am being coerced, manipulated and discriminated against for my decision to not be involved and I ask for your immediate intervention and protection on my behalf. I am willing to purchase and take a regular rapid antigen test as a less restrictive alternative and ask that you act on my behalf to make this option, and any other reasonable less restrictive option, available to me immediately in a way that allows me to not be discriminated against. I would also like your advice on 1. How I can challenge my right to not be discriminated against when accessing services 2. How I can get a vaccination exemption until the vaccines are not experimental 3. How I can get my doctor to support me in postponing a vaccination requirement until the vaccines are no longer experimental 4. How I can choose the vaccine that has shown the most clinical efficacy and least adverse effects 5. How I can hold my government to account as they are not abiding by a non-derogable right under article 4(2) of the ICCPR freedom from medical or scientific experimentation without consent (art 7, freedom from punishment, freedom of thought, conscience and religion. I would also ask you to protect my right to 1. 'Freedom from ... punishment' as I am being excluded from work and services because of my choice to not consent to an experimental vaccine. 2. 'Freedom of thought, conscience and religion' a. I have been thoroughly looking at the science behind the vaccines and am well informed with international statistics. My understanding cautions me to wait for further information. b. I recently learned that the Pfizer vaccine includes human embryo cells (which Pfizer has not been willing to publicise) and this goes against my conscience. c. And finally, I learned that Moderna has suspended using the vaccine for 12-17-year- old due to health concerns and even though they are saying this based on adverse events the Australian Government continues to allow Moderna vaccines for young people AGAINST adverse reactions data. For further information I have include, below information that has helped me to understand my rights and the reason why I contacted you and I have highlighted the areas that stand out most to me. Yours Sincerely, Sourced from Deputy Lyndall Dean Fair Work Commission Decision 2021 Vaccinations should be voluntary a. Unlike many other vaccinations such as those used to stop the spread of tetanus, yellow fever and smallpox, COVID vaccinations are not designed to stop COVID. They are designed to reduce the symptoms of the virus, however a fully vaccinated person can contract and transmit COVID. b. The science is clear in that COVID is less serious for those who are young and otherwise healthy compared to those who are elderly and/or who have co-morbidities. In other words, the risk of COVID is far greater for those who are elderly or have co-morbidities. Around 87% of those who have died with COVID in Australia are over 80 years old and had other pre-existing illnesses listed on their death certificates. c. The World Health Organisation has stated that most people diagnosed with COVID will recover without the need for any medical treatment. d. The vaccines are only provisionally approved for use in Australia and are accordingly still part of a clinical trial 20. e. There are side effects to the COVID vaccines that are now known. That side effects exist is not a conspiracy theory. f. The long-term effects of the COVID vaccines are unknown, and this is recognised by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) in Australia. Consent is required for participation in clinical trials [114] Consent is required for all participation in a clinical trial. Consent is necessary because people have a fundamental right to bodily integrity, that being autonomy and self-determination over their own body without unconsented physical intrusion. Voluntary consent for any medical treatment has been a fundamental part of the laws of Australia and internationally for decades. It is legally, ethically and morally wrong to coerce a person to participate in a clinical trial. [115] Coercion is not consent. Coercion is the practice of persuading someone to do something using force or threats. Some have suggested that there is no coercion in threatening a person with dismissal and withdrawing their ability to participate in society if that person does not have the COVID vaccine. However, nothing could be further from the truth. [116] All COVID vaccines in Australia are only provisionally approved, and as such remain part of a clinical trial 21. This is not part of a conspiracy theory. It is a fact easily verifiable from the website of the TGA, Australia's regulatory authority responsible for assessing and registering/approving all COVID vaccines before they can be used in Australia. [117] The requirement for consent in this context is not new and should never be controversial. The Nuremburg Code (the Code), formulated in 1947 in response to Nazi doctors performing medical experiments on people during WWII, is one of the most important documents in the history of the ethics of medical research. [118] The first principle of the Code is that "The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential". The Code goes on to say that "This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision...." [119] Informed and freely given consent is at the heart of the Code and is rightly viewed as a protection of a person's human rights. [120] The United Nations, including through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, first proclaimed in 1948, has long recognised the right to bodily integrity. [121] The Declaration of Helsinki (the Declaration), made in 1964 by the World Medical Association, is also a statement of ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Under the heading of "Informed Consent", the Declaration starts with the acknowledgement that "Participation by individuals capable of giving informed consent as subjects in medical research must be voluntary". [122] Australia is a party to the seven core international human rights treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. [123] The Australian Human Right Commission Act 1986 (Cth) gives effect to Australia's obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which provides in Article 7 that "...no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation". [124] In 1984, the American Association for the International Commission of Jurists (AAICJ) held an international colloquium in Siracusa, Italy, which was co-sponsored by the International Commission of Jurists. The focus of the colloquium was the limitation and derogation provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the outcome is a document that is referred to as the Siracusa Principles 22. [125] The introductory note to the Siracusa Principles commences in the following terms: "It has long been observed by the American Association for the International Commission of Jurists (AAICJ) that one of the main instruments employed by governments to repress and deny the fundamental rights and freedoms of peoples has been the illegal and unwarranted Declaration of Martial Law or a State of Emergency. Very often these measures are taken under the pretext of the existence of a "public emergency which threatens the life of a nation" or "threats to national security". The abuse of applicable provisions allowing governments to limit or derogate from certain rights contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights has resulted in the need for a closer examination of the conditions and grounds for permissible limitations and derogations in order to achieve an effective implementation of the rule of law. The United Nations General Assembly has frequently emphasised the importance of a uniform interpretation of limitations on rights enunciated in the Covenant." [126] Paragraph 58 of the Siracusa Principles under the heading of Non-Derogable Rights provides: No state party shall, even in time of emergency threatening the life of the nation, derogate from the Covenant's guarantees of the right to life; freedom from torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and from medical or scientific experimentation without free consent; freedom from slavery or involuntary servitude; the right not be be imprisoned for contractual debt; the right not to be convicted or sentenced to a heavier penalty by virtue of retroactive criminal legislation; the right to recognition as a person before the law; and freedom of thought, conscience and religion. These rights are not derogable under any conditions even for the asserted purpose of preserving the life of the nation, (emphasis added) [127] This is consistent with Article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. [128] Australia's National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research 23 confirms that consent is a fundamental requirement for participation in any clinical trial, and that "no person should be subject to coercion or pressure in deciding whether to participate" in a clinical trial. Further, the Australian Government's Consumer Guide to Clinical Trials!^ also confirms that participation in a clinical trial is voluntary, and states "it is important that you never feel forced to take part in a trial". [129] Freely given consent to any medical treatment, particularly in the context of a clinical trial, is not optional. Coercion is completely incompatible with consent, and denying a person the ability to work and participate in society if the person does not have a COVID vaccine will unquestionably breach this fundamental and internationally recognised human right. Can COVID vaccinations be mandated by employers on health and safety grounds? [130] The short answer to this question, in almost every case, is no. [131] The fundamental starting point here is the answer to the question - what is the risk? All risk controls are (or should be) designed to address an identified risk. The risk needs to be a real risk and not a perceived risk. The real risk for employers is that a person who has COVID will spread COVID to others within the workplace. [132] The risk of spreading COVID only arises with a person who has COVID. This should be apparent and obvious. There is no risk associated with a person who is unvaccinated and does not have COVID, notwithstanding the misleading statements by politicians that the unvaccinated are a significant threat to the vaccinated, supposedly justifying "locking out the unvaccinated from society" and denying them the ability to work. [133] The primary duty of care for employers under health and safety law requires the employer to ensure health and safety so far as is reasonably practicable by eliminating risks to health and safety, and if this is not reasonably practicable, risks must be minimised so far as is reasonably practicable. [134] There is nothing controversial in stating that vaccines do not eliminate the risk of COVID, given that those who are vaccinated can catch and transmit COVID. By way of one example, a report issued by the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the United States on 6 August 2021 25 looked at an outbreak of COVID in Massachusetts during July 2021. Of the 469 COVID cases identified, 74% were fully vaccinated. Of this group, 79% were symptomatic. In total, 5 people required hospitalisation and of these, 4 were fully vaccinated. This is not an anomaly - the data from many countries and other parts of the United States provides a similar picture, although obtaining similar data from the United States will now be problematic given the decision by the CDC on 1 May 2021 to cease monitoring and recording breakthrough case information unless the person is hospitalised or dies. What is clear, however, is that the vaccine is not an effective control measure to deal with transmission of COVID by itself. [135] In order for an employer to meet its duties under health and safety laws, it will need to minimise the risk of exposure to COVID in the workplace, which will require employers to apply all reasonably practicable COVID control measures. [136] As noted earlier, Safe Work Australia, in relation to whether employers need to include mandatory vaccination as a control measure to comply with WHS duties, has advised that "it is unlikely that a requirement for workers to be vaccinated will be 'reasonably practicable'". [137] The Safe Work Australia website also includes the following advice to employers: "Employers have a duty under the model Work Health and Safety (WHS) laws to eliminate, or if that is not reasonably practicable, minimise the risk of exposure to COVID-19 in the workplace. ....... However, while this is a decision you will need to make taking into account your workplace, most employers will not need to make vaccination mandatory to comply with the model WHS laws. A safe and effective vaccine is only one part of keeping the Australian community safe and healthy. To meet your duties under the model WHS laws and minimise the risk of exposure to COVID-19 in your workplace, you must continue to apply all reasonably practicable COVID-19 control measures including physical distancing, good hygiene and regular cleaning and maintenance and ensuring your workers do not attend work if they are unwell." 26 [138] It is very clear that a range of control measures will need to be implemented by employers to meet their health and safety obligations. In addition to the measures noted above, controls (based on a proper assessment of the risk in a particular workplace) might include appropriate air ventilation and filters, personal protective equipment including masks, staggered meal breaks, increased use of outdoor areas etc. The simple act of requiring people to stay at home if unwell and symptomatic will no doubt have a significant impact on the spread of all coronaviruses (whether a cold, flu or COVID). [139] Critically, there is another alternative to vaccines to assist employers in meeting their WHS obligations, that being testing. Given there is no doubt that those who are fully vaccinated can catch and transmit the virus, testing (whether rapid antigen or otherwise) will provide employers with a level of comfort that a worker does not have COVID and therefore will not transmit COVID to others (that being the risk that is to be managed) in the workplace. [140] Testing is now widely used around the world as a risk control for the spread of COVID. There is absolutely no reason why it cannot be widely used in Australia. [141] Testing is arguably a better control measure compared to vaccines in meeting health and safety obligations. [142] Vaccines have not been broadly mandated on health and safety grounds in most countries. For example, despite what has been reported in Australia, most of the European Union (EU) and the Scandinavian countries have not actually mandated vaccinations for travel purposes. EU citizens can travel freely now if any one of three options are satisfied, that being a vaccine, a negative COVID test, or evidence of having recently recovered from COVID (in recognition of the natural immunity that comes with having recovered from having COVID). The EU have provided these options so that people who are not vaccinated will not be discriminated against when travelling across the EU. In other words, all those who are not vaccinated can get tested for COVID and travel freely 27. [143] In a scientific brief prepared by the World Health Organisation (WHO) dated 10 May 2021 on COVID natural immunity, the WHO found that "within four weeks following infection, 90-99% of individuals infected with [COVID] virus develop detectable neutralising antibodies....". Further, "available scientific data suggests that in most people immune responses remain robust and protective against reinfection for at least 6-8 months after infection (the longest follow up with strong scientific evidence is currently approximately 8 months)". [144] The science is clear that those who have recovered from COVID have at least the same level of protection from COVID as a person who has been vaccinated. There can be absolutely no legitimate basis, then, for mandating vaccination for this group of people. [145] In short, there is no justifiable basis for employers to mandate COVID vaccinations to meet their health and safety obligations when other options are available to appropriately manage the risk. [146] Finally, it should be clearly understood that employers who mandate vaccinations will be liable for any adverse reactions their workers may experience, given this is a foreseeable outcome for some people. Use of Public Health Orders to mandate vaccinations [152] The Australian Health Protection Principal Committee (AHPPC) is Australia's key decision making body for heath emergencies and public health emergency management. It has issued a number of public statements on minimising the potential risk of COVID 28, the purpose of which is to provide advice on the appropriate management of COVID in certain industries or occupation groups. [153] A statement on COVID vaccination requirements for aged care workers it issued on 4 June 2021 29 commences with the following: "AHPPC does not recommend compulsory COVID-19 vaccines for aged care workers" (emphasis added) [154] Notwithstanding this advice, a PHO has been made mandating COVID vaccinations for aged care workers. [155] The AHPPC statement on minimising the potential risk of COVID transmission in schools, made on 26 July 2021, does not recommend compulsory COVID vaccines for school staff either. 161] The Great Barrington Declaration (GB Declaration) 31, a statement by infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists, recommended an approach called Focused Protection. The GB Declaration includes the following: "Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health - leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. ....We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all - including the vulnerable - falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity - i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable - and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in­ person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity." (emphasis added) [162] The authors and first signatories to the GB Declaration were Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations, Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modelling of infectious diseases, and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations. [163] The qualifications held by the list of 44 co-signatories to the GB Declaration is impressive 32, and since the GB Declaration was first made, over 860,000 scientists and health professionals have signed the GB Declaration. [164] It should be abundantly clear that there are other, far less restrictive and less intrusive ways in which we can ensure public health and appropriately address the risk of COVID without resorting to the extreme measures currently in place. [165] In an article published by Monash University's Castan Centre for Human Rights Law, the author, Professor the Hon Kevin Bell AM QC 33, considered the COVID guidance issued by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for introducing COVID response measures consistent with human rights. He provided the following summary: • "Governments have to take difficult decisions in response to COVID-19. International law allows emergency measures in response to significant threats - but measures that restrict human rights should be proportionate to the evaluated risk, necessary and applied in a non-discriminatory way. This means having a specific focus and duration, and taking the least intrusive approach possible to protect public health. • With regard to COVID-19, emergency powers must only be used for legitimate public health goals, not used as a basis to quash dissent, silence the work of human rights defenders or journalists, deny other human rights or take any other steps that are not strictly necessary to address the health situation. • Governments should inform the affected population of what the emergency measures are, where they apply and for how long they are intended to remain in effect, and should update this information regularly and make it widely available. • As soon as feasible, it will be important for Governments to ensure a return to life as normal and not use emergency powers to indefinitely regulate day-to-day life, recognising that the response must match the needs of different phases of the crisis". [166] In an article recently published by two Senior Lecturers from the Faculty of Law at Monash University entitled "Wars, Pandemics and Emergencies What can history tell us about executive power and surveillance in times ofCrisis?" 34, the authors concluded that "in an emergency, we must be particularly vigilant to protect civil liberties and human rights against incursions that are more than the absolute minimum necessary to combat the crisis...." [167] The Australian Financial Review, in an article published on 8 September 2021 entitled "The 17,000flu linked deaths no one is talking about" 35, notes that modelling by the Doherty Institute says about 600 people die each year of influenza and there are about 200,000 cases annually, but in 2019, influenza and pneumonia were the underlying cause of 4124 deaths in Australia. While the vast majority of these deaths are people over the age of 80, there is an annual average of 5 infants under the age of one, 13 children aged 1-14, and 48 people aged 25-44 that died of flu or pneumonia in 2019. [168] The article goes on to note that about 17,385 people died with flu and pneumonia in 2019, where flu and pneumonia was either the underlying cause or an associate cause of death, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics. In Sweden, doctors in one county analysed all their COVID deaths and found that COVID was the chief underlying cause of death in only 15% of cases. In 70% of cases COVID was an associated cause of death, and in the remaining 15% of cases it was irrelevant. [169] To put all of this further in perspective, Australia is ranked 118th in the world for COVID deaths. Broadly speaking, Australia has had around 56,000 cases of COVID with around 1,000 deaths. Of the deaths in Australia, only 1% were under the age of 50. In the same time period as the 1,000 COVID deaths, around 200,000 Australians have died for other reasons, including around 70,000 from cancer, 19,000 from heart disease, 17,000 from respiratory illnesses (not COVID), 13,000 from strokes and 4,500 from suicide. [170] Each and every single day, around 8,000 children die around the world from starvation, which of course is completely preventable. [171] As at 2019, there were 4,344 paedophiles in NSW on the Child Protection Register. There are no blanket rules which prevent these people from working or participating in society, nor do they have to declare that they are paedophiles before entering a business or a school. [172] The initial predictions of a 60% infection rate from COVID with a 1% death rate thankfully did not materialise. It is now time to ask whether the 'cure' is proportionate to the risk, and the answer should be a resounding no. When deciding now what is actually reasonable, necessary and proportionate in terms of any response to COVID, governments and employers should actively avoid the hysteria and fear-mongering that is now so prevalent in the public discourse, and which will cloud rational, fact based decision making. [173] In summary, the powers to make PHOs cannot lawfully be used in a way that is punitive, and human rights are not suspended during states of emergency or disaster. The current PHOs have moved well past the minimum necessary to achieve public health aims, and into the realm of depravation. It is not proportionate, reasonable or necessary to "lock out" those who are unvaccinated and remove their ability to work or otherwise contribute to society. PHOs, by their nature, are designed and intended for short term use in the event of an emergency or crisis. They are not intended to be an ongoing vehicle to enforce significant depravations of our civil liberties. The COVID pandemic started over 20 months ago. The time is fast approaching where the reliance on PHO's will no longer be justified on public health grounds, particularly where there is such a significant intrusion on individual liberties. Disability Discrimination [174] It is highly likely that the dismissal of an employee who fails to have the COVID vaccine will breach the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DD Act). The DD Act makes it unlawful to discriminate against a person, including in employment and in accessing services, because of a disability. [175] The definition of disability in s.4 of the DD Act includes "the presence in the body of organisms capable of causing disease or illness". It includes a disability that presently exists, or previously existed but no longer exists, or may exist in the future, or is imputed to a person. [176] The Explanatory Memorandum to the DD Act discusses the definition of disability as being: "...intended to include physical, sensory, intellectual and psychiatric impairment, mental illness or disorder, and provisions relating to the presence in the body of organisms capable of causing disease. These provisions have broad application, for example, they are intended to ensure that persons with HIV/AIDS come within the definition of disability for the purposes of this Bill." [177] As a recent article has highlighted, 36 gay men were the prime target for protection under this part of the definition of disability because of a perception they were at a greater risk from HIV. In this situation the DD Act works to prohibit all types of discrimination not only against gay men but everyone who may in future be infected with HIV. The author notes that "for the same legal reason that a publican cannot say 'gay men are not allowed into my pub because they might be infected with HIV', a publican also cannot say 'unvaccinated people are not allowed into my pub because they might be infected with measles. Nor is it valid for a State or Territory to pass a law to that effect - the Act binds them too." [178] Section 48 of the DD Act provides an exemption for discrimination that is necessary to protect public health where a person's disability is an infectious disease, however being unvaccinated is not an infectious disease. What logically follows is that an employer who dismisses a person because they do not have a COVID vaccine will breach the DD Act. Final comments [179] Research in the context of COVID-19 has shown that many who are 'vaccine-hesitant' are well educated, work in the health care industry and have questions about how effective the vaccines are in stopping transmission, whether they are safe to take during pregnancy, or if they affect fertility. 37 A far safer and more democratic approach to addressing vaccine hesitancy, and therefore increasing voluntary vaccination uptake, lies in better education, addressing specific and often legitimate concerns that people may hold, and promoting genuine informed consent. It does not lie in censoring differing opinions or removing rights and civil liberties that are fundamental in a democratic nation. It certainly does not lie in the use of highly coercive, undemocratic and unethical mandates. [180] The statements by politicians that those who are not vaccinated are a threat to public health and should be "locked out of society" and denied the ability to work are not measures to protect public health. They are not about public health and not justified because they do not address the actual risk of COVID. These measures can only be about punishing those who choose not to be vaccinated. If the purpose of the PHOs is genuinely to reduce the spread of COVID, there is no basis for locking out people who do not have COVID, which is easily established by a rapid antigen test. Conversely, a vaccinated person who contracts COVID should be required to isolate until such time as they have recovered. [181] Blanket rules, such as mandating vaccinations for everyone across a whole profession or industry regardless of the actual risk, fail the tests of proportionality, necessity and reasonableness. It is more than the absolute minimum necessary to combat the crisis and cannot be justified on health grounds. It is a lazy and fundamentally flawed approach to risk management and should be soundly rejected by courts when challenged. [182] All Australians should vigorously oppose the introduction of a system of medical apartheid and segregation in Australia. It is an abhorrent concept and is morally and ethically wrong, and the anthesis of our democratic way of life and everything we value. [183] Australians should also vigorously oppose the ongoing censorship of any views that question the current policies regarding COVID. Science is no longer science if it a person is not allowed to question it. [184] Finally, all Australians, including those who hold or are suspected of holding "anti-vaccination sentiments", are entitled to the protection of our laws, including the protections afforded by the Fair Work Act. In this regard, one can only hope that the Majority Decision is recognised as an anomaly and not followed by others. 'k Q J 2 VICE PRESIDENT Appearances-. Mr7 Pearce of counsel for the Appellant. Mr R Reitano of counsel for the Respondent. Hearing details: 2021. Sydney (via video-link): 29 June. Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer VRBPAC Briefing Document Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee Meeting December 17, 2020 FDA Briefing Document Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine 8.3 Known Risks The vaccine elicited increased local and systemic adverse reactions as compared to those in the placebo arm, usually lasting a few days. The most common solicited adverse reactions were pain at injection site (91.6%), fatigue (68.5%), headache (63.0%), muscle pain (59.6%), joint pain (44.8%), and chills (43.4%). Adverse reactions characterized as reactogenicity were generally mild to moderate; 0.2% to 9.7% of these events were reported as severe, with severe solicited adverse reactions being more frequent after dose 2 than after dose 1 and generally less frequent in older adults (>65 years of age) as compared to younger participants. Among reported unsolicited adverse events, lymphadenopathy occurred much more frequently in the vaccine group than the placebo group and is plausibly related to vaccination. The number of participants reporting hypersensitivity-related adverse events was numerically higher in the vaccine group compared with the placebo group (258 events in 233 participants [1.5%] vs. 185 events in 166 participants [1.1%]). There were no anaphylactic or severe hypersensitivity reactions with close temporal relation to the vaccine. Serious adverse events, while uncommon (1.0% in both treatment groups), represented medical events that occur in the general population at similar frequency as observed in the study. Of the 7 SAEs in the mRNA-1273 group that were considered as related by the investigator, FDA considered 3 as related: intractable nausea and vomiting (n=l), facial swelling (n=2). For the serious adverse events of rheumatoid arthritis, peripheral edema/dyspnea with exertion, and autonomic dysfunction, a possibility of vaccine contribution cannot be excluded. For the event of B-cell lymphoma, an alternative etiology is more likely. An SAE of Bell's palsy occurred in a vaccine recipient, for which a causal relationship to vaccination cannot be concluded at this time. No specific safety concerns were identified in subgroup analyses by age, race, ethnicity, medical comorbidities, or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. 8.4 Unknown Risks/Data Gaps Safety in certain subpopulations There are currently insufficient data to make conclusions about the safety of the vaccine in subpopulations such as children less than 18 years of age, pregnant and lactating individuals, and immunocompromised individuals. FDA review of a combined developmental and perinatal/postnatal reproductive toxicity study of mRNA-1273 in female rats concluded that mRNA1273 given prior to mating and during gestation periods at dose of 100 pg did not have any effects on female reproduction, fetal/embryonal development, or postnatal developmental except for skeletal variations which are common and typically resolve postnatally without intervention Adverse reactions that are very uncommon or that require longer follow-up to be detected Following authorization of the vaccine, use in large numbers of individuals may reveal additional, potentially less frequent and/or more serious adverse events not detected in the trial safety population of approximately 30,000 participants over the period of follow-up at this time. Active and passive safety surveillance will continue during the post-authorization period to detect new safety signals. 51 Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine VRBPAC Briefing Document Although the safety database revealed an imbalance of cases of Bell's palsy (3 in the vaccine group and 1 in the placebo group), causal relationship is less certain because the number of cases was small and not more frequent than expected in the general population. Further signal detection efforts for these adverse events will be informative with more widespread use of the vaccine. Vaccine-enhanced disease Available data do not indicate a risk of vaccine-enhanced disease, and conversely suggest effectiveness against severe disease within the available follow-up period. However, risk of vaccine- enhanced disease over time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown and needs to be evaluated further in ongoing clinical trials and in observational studies that could be conducted following authorization and/or licensure. VRBPAC Briefing Document Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee Meeting December 17, 2020 FDA Briefing Document Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine 8.3 Known Risks The vaccine elicited increased local and systemic adverse reactions as compared to those in the placebo arm, usually lasting a few days. The most common solicited adverse reactions were pain at injection site (91.6%), fatigue (68.5%), headache (63.0%), muscle pain (59.6%), joint pain (44.8%), and chills (43.4%). Adverse reactions characterized as reactogenicity were generally mild to moderate; 0.2% to 9.7% of these events were reported as severe, with severe solicited adverse reactions being more frequent after dose 2 than after dose 1 and generally less frequent in older adults (>65 years of age) as compared to younger participants. Among reported unsolicited adverse events, lymphadenopathy occurred much more frequently in the vaccine group than the placebo group and is plausibly related to vaccination. The number of participants reporting hypersensitivity-related adverse events was numerically higher in the vaccine group compared with the placebo group (258 events in 233 participants [1.5%] vs. 185 events in 166 participants [1.1%]). There were no anaphylactic or severe hypersensitivity reactions with close temporal relation to the vaccine. Serious adverse events, while uncommon (1.0% in both treatment groups), represented medical events that occur in the general population at similar frequency as observed in the study. Of the 7 SAEs in the mRNA-1273 group that were considered as related by the investigator, FDA considered 3 as related: intractable nausea and vomiting (n=l), facial swelling (n=2). For the serious adverse events of rheumatoid arthritis, peripheral edema/dyspnea with exertion, and autonomic dysfunction, a possibility of vaccine contribution cannot be excluded. For the event of B-cell lymphoma, an alternative etiology is more likely. An SAE of Bell's palsy occurred in a vaccine recipient, for which a causal relationship to vaccination cannot be concluded at this time. No specific safety concerns were identified in subgroup analyses by age, race, ethnicity, medical comorbidities, or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. 8.4 Unknown Risks/Data Gaps Safety in certain subpopulations There are currently insufficient data to make conclusions about the safety of the vaccine in subpopulations such as children less than 18 years of age, pregnant and lactating individuals, and immunocompromised individuals. FDA review of a combined developmental and perinatal/postnatal reproductive toxicity study of mRNA-1273 in female rats concluded that mRNA1273 given prior to mating and during gestation periods at dose of 100 pg did not have any effects on female reproduction, fetal/embryonal development, or postnatal developmental except for skeletal variations which are common and typically resolve postnatally without intervention Adverse reactions that are very uncommon or that require longer follow-up to be detected Following authorization of the vaccine, use in large numbers of individuals may reveal additional, potentially less frequent and/or more serious adverse events not detected in the trial safety population of approximately 30,000 participants over the period of follow-up at this time. Active and passive safety surveillance will continue during the post-authorization period to detect new safety signals. 51 Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine VRBPAC Briefing Document Although the safety database revealed an imbalance of cases of Bell's palsy (3 in the vaccine group and 1 in the placebo group), causal relationship is less certain because the number of cases was small and not more frequent than expected in the general population. Further signal detection efforts for these adverse events will be informative with more widespread use of the vaccine. Vaccine-enhanced disease Available data do not indicate a risk of vaccine-enhanced disease, and conversely suggest effectiveness against severe disease within the available follow-up period. However, risk of vaccine- enhanced disease over time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown and needs to be evaluated further in ongoing clinical trials and in observational studies that could be conducted following authorization and/or licensure. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0189 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0190 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0190.pdf To whom it may concern: My name is Janet. I trained and qualified as a registered nurse in the UK in 1980 to 1983. I immigrated to Australia in 1984 and have since become an Australian citizen. I have worked in Australia as a registered nurse since 1985 in various major hospitals and in community health around Australia and so I have had at least 36 years of a broad range experience working as a registered nurse. My last job as a registered nurse was working as a community registered nurse for Silverchain/RDNS (Royal District Nursing Service) in South Australia, and I worked for this company from 2013 to 2021. I was terminated from this establishment in May 2022 as declined an experimental injection in order to keep my job. Everything I had been taught up until this point in nursing in regards to medicine was about 'Evidence based medicine/ medicine that had been tested thoroughly before it was released on the market. But suddenly we were being told to take these experimental vaccines or lose our job. We had no idea of the short or long term effects. Also at this time despite the hype and fear messages on main stream media, research was saying that 99.9% of healthy people recover well after covid. The covid 19 vaccines are only provisionally approved in Australia by the TGA. The approval process can take between 5 to 10 years. So we still do not have long term data to make an informed and enlightened decision After thorough research I listened to my own common sense, bodily autonomy and intuition and made the decision to not receive this experiment. I was aware that losing my job would affect me financially but I had full conviction that I was doing the right thing, and still do. I was terminated from my job at aged 60 and at least due to my age I was able to access all my superannuation to help me with my mortgage payments. Unfortunately this means I will have no superannuation to rely on in retirement and I have used a substantial amount of my superannuation to survive. I have however, been one of the lucky ones in this situation that has effected many others in a terrible way such as losing their businesses, homes, marriages and even their life. It has been unlawful to force someone to have an experimental medication in order to keep their career/job, especially when there is no informed consent. The Nuremberg code outlaws forced medical procedures which include mandatory vaccinations. Australia is a signatory to the International covenant on civil and political rights which states that no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation. The Australian Immunization Handbook states "Valid consent must be obtained from patients prior to any vaccination" Alex Antic senator of South Australia has quoted "for consent to be legally valid vaccines must be given voluntarily in the absence of undue pressure, coercion or manipulation." So now I am writing to you, The Australian human Rights commission, under basic human rights what can I do to seek remedy or recourse from this situation? Kind regards Janet Wilson RN ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0190 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0191 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0191.pdf IF ONE DEATH OUT OF 1OK COVID CASES SHUT DOWN THE COUNTRY SHOULDN’T ONE DEATH OUT OF 1OK VACCINES SHUT DOWN THE PROGRAM? ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0191 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0192 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0192.pdf I would like to submit a response requesting a proper Royal Commission and investigation into the COVID response taken by this country, the processes taken by the government in the procurement of the vaccines, the approval process by the TGA for granting emergency use authorisation of the vaccines when other safer and effective options were available, ineffective use of mask mandates, lockdowns, vaccine mandates, censoring of people who didn't support the governments narrative, misinformation by the government and media outlets, vaccine adverse event reporting, and the discrimination of those that are unvaccinated. This mandate has affected me in many ways both mentally, physically and financially. I worked for Queensland Health at the Bundaberg Hospital for 14.5 years and have worked my way to be one of the senior Physiotherapists at the Hospital. I have acted as the Director of Physiotherapy many times in the past. This has now effectively stopped my career progression and has ended my Physiotherapy career now with Queensland Health as I am unable to work in the public setting. The mandates meant that I was not able to work in my profession for 18 months or make any income from my profession. I have struggled mentally to come to terms with being banned from working in the profession that I love for making an educated and informed decision about my own healthcare needs. Not being able to provide an income for my family was also very mentally draining and stressful. Prior to being told I cannot work at the hospital anymore, I applied for the only position above my clinical position and was told that I had made merit for the interview process. The process was halted once the mandate came into effect, and this may have caused me loss of future income if I had been the successful candidate for the position. I not only lost my ability to work, but also many of my friends due to the segregation and discrimination for making an informed decision based on the available data and research. The Queensland Government didn't provide any of the evidence, research, or data by which they based their recommendations and mandates on when I asked. There is no wonder that many clinicians are hesitant as the research is simply not being provided for us to make those decisions. I have also seen many of the adverse reactions happen to friends and work colleagues which make me even more hesitant and stressed at the thought that the Government is trying to force us to get the injection. The hospital has now lost and experienced staff member that used to work in any area of the hospital, used to train staff across the district and provide excellent care to the patients that presented to the hospital. All of this is leading to poorer patient outcomes and service delivery by the hospital. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0192 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0193 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0193.pdf I am a disabled writer and advocate who continues to take precautions during the ongoing pandemic. I am passionate about access and inclusion, particularly the use of plain language and Easy Read to deliver information in a way that is clear and easy to understand for the widest possible audience. The concerns I wish to raise in this submission mostly relate to the reduction and ultimate removal of mandatory isolation periods, as well as public health messaging around the use of masks and the risks of single and repeated COVID infections. The removal of mandatory isolation for those who test positive for COVID-19 on October 14 2022 was terrifying and dangerous for myself and many others. We are essentially housebound as this is the only way to keep ourselves safe. Removing mandatory isolation meant that people could - can - spread a virus whose long term impacts we are only just beginning to understand. Wearing a mask - specifically an N95 mask - is one of the precautions I take whenever I leave my house or have visitors. However, due to a failure of public health messaging, most people no longer wear masks. Those who do often wear surgical masks which - though better than nothing - are not as effective. I am disappointed that the Department of Health website says nothing about the effectiveness of different types of masks. Masks are also not affordable for many people, particularly as the cost of living increases. While I am deeply grateful that some NDIS participants can claim the cost of masks and other PRE, the cost of masks are likely to be a deterrent for those who would otherwise wear one and prioritise their safety and that of others. I would like to get my next COVID vaccine, but when I contacted several of the vaccine providers listed on the Australian Department of Health website, I was told they did not administer COVID vaccinations. As a disabled person well aware of the risks of a single COVID infection (let alone repeated infections) much of the world has become unsafe and inaccessible for me. I hope that my submission and the broader results of this inquiry demonstrate that we can and should do more to educate people about and protect them from the ongoing COVID pandemic. Please feel free to contact me for further information. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0193 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0194 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0194.pdf 9th December 2023 To Whom it May Concern; I am writing to you regarding the enquiry into Covid-19 and the effects of the vaccine mandates. I am a mother of two children living in Perth, Western Australia. I would like to make some points and suggestions regarding the pandemic. • The impact on schooling and children: It was well know statistically that the pandemic did not effect children and the death rate was close to Nil, only effecting those who were already ill of health. The impact of schools closing, parents having to home school their children and then having to vaccinate children to protect the elderly resulted in • increased anxiety • mental health issues • stunt in learning • unknown impact of MRNA vaccination on children in years to come. Improvement suggestions: In the future, children should never be the victims to protect the elderly. Children are the MOST vulnerable in our society and do not have a voice, they cannot speak for themselves and it is an abuse of power to have them vaccinated when the virus would not result in death or long term harm for the majority of the population. • The impact of vaccination in regards to death, heart issues and other health issues. We have had a number of family friends have blood clots, a death, increased health issue, shingles, repeats of the covid virus and depleted health after their vaccinations. My father was the only person in our famil^wh^wa^accinated and has deteriorated tremendously, recently being diagnosed with^^^^^^^^^^^B Please see a study on the effect of vaccinations below, that show only approximately 32% have not impact: Received: 17 July 2023 DOI: 10.1111/601.14102 Max Schmeling1 LETTER TO THE EDITOR Vibeke Manniche2 Wiley Peter Riis Hansen3,4 © Batch-dependent safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine Wiley Batch-dependent safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Finally, after publication of our report, we have become vaccine aware of the first Periodic Safety Update Report (PSUR) for the BNT162b2 vaccine covering the period 19 Decem­ ber 2020 to 18 June 2021 that was submitted to the Euro­ pean Medicines Agency on 19 August 2021 by the market authorization holder (BioNTech).11 This PSUR appears to • 4.2% Doses confirm a large variation in numbers of adverse events be­ EJ6796, EJ6797, EM0477, EJ6136, EJ6134, EK9788, EJ6789, EJ6790, EP9598 tween different BNT162b2 batches and batches with the highest number of adverse events reported here were all those represented by the blue ‘high SAE’ trendline in the figure of our published study.111 63.7% Doses Improvement suggestions: Governments need to take more responsibility in promoting immune health and listening to doctors treating virus patients that are having success. Many doctors were treating the elderly using therapeutics and methods that boosted the immune system such as Vitamin D, Vitamin K, Vitamin C, Turmeric, Zinc, Ivermectin and more. These immune boosting methods were not promoted and some even band to increase the roll out of MRNA vaccination. Not going into contracts with Pharmaceutical companies who have previously been fined for false advertising and misconduct. Not signing up to contracts with Pharmaceutical companies that will not take any responsibility for damage or loss of life with their product. • Media Censoring: During the pandemic, the media would only report on the urgency to be vaccinated and silence any objections to vaccination. There was coercion and manipulation in the public domain and through the media organised by the government departments to be vaccinated. I can remember hearing they were offering a lottery of $1M if you would go and get vaccinated during a particular time period! There was persecution toward the un­ vaccinated in the form of loss of jobs, ridicule, unable to buy certain products with out a vaccination status. We were personally impacted in this way. Improvement suggestions: More independent media and freedom of speech. Dis engage from contracts with WHO when they want autonomy over decisions relating to full power during emergency health crisis. This is only the beginning of the impact on us and others during the pandemic. We would like to see the laws changed regarding lock downs, mandates. It was ridiculous to hear the masks were mandated when many well regarded surgeons said that they do not provide protection against air­ born virus’. Thank you for the opportunity to express these concerns and make suggestions to handle the pandemic better in the future. Regards, Juliette Smith Western Australia ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0194 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0195 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0195.pdf Commonwealth Government Covid 19 Response Enquiry Submission. I am a retired CEO and Company Director. I have run both large corporates and social enterprises. I have also served on the boards of both NFPs and social enterprises. I am immunocompromised with a blood cancer; my partner is also immunocompromised with a heart condition. My son has cancer likely caused by Covid infection and my sister has neuroendocrine cancer. As such, myself and my family have been greatly affected by Covid itself and also by the responses of Australian Governments thus far into this still ongoing pandemic. 1. The role of the Federal & State Governments and other advisory bodies: 1.1 The Morrison Government: The gross incompetence and politicisation of the Morrison government plus recommended actions are well recorded in the Senate Select Committee on Covid 19 report tabled on 7th April 2022: https://www.aph.jiov.au/Parliamentary Business/Committees/Senate/COVID- 19/COVID19/Report For the first time in our history public health had been almost completely abandoned, with Morrison declaring that Australian’s needed to take “personal responsibility” for their health: https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/scott-nnorrison-urges-personal-responsibility- instead-of-mask-mandates-and-lockdown/h2tlrp5k2 For myself and my family a lack of public health measures meant locking down in our home and choosing not to continue work due to the high risk of Covid infection - a very privileged option most others did not have. It also meant missing the birth of our first grandchild and not being able to physically support our son and his family in their time of need. A lack of trust in the Morrison government and the CMO, meant relying on the advice of overseas bodies (CDC, NHS, etc), coupled with advices from local credible sources such as the Victorian CHO and Premier as well as apolitical experts such as Raina McIntyre, Brendan Crabb and Peter Doherty. 1.2 Albanese government: After being highly critical of the Morrison government’s response to Covid, it was a complete betrayal of the Australian public for Albanese to go even further in removing effectively all remaining public health measures: https://www.thesaturdaypaper.c m.au/news/p litics/2022/' j8/albaneses-choice-c vid-19-and- public-health#hrd The Albanese government continued the well publicised policy of gaslighting by Morrison and slowly commenced removing even the access to Covid data from the public: https://www.thesaturdaypaper.c m.au/news/politics/2022/07/23/next-covid-wave-the- g /ernment-gasliqhtinq-the-community#hrd Vaccine procurement was even slower than previously and vaccine and anti-viral access was further restricted - inconsistent with other health bodies and the WHO. Meanwhile the CMO Kelly has continued marketing the virtues of “rich hybrid immunity” -a policy unsupported by independent science. It is also morally corrupt given the death and disablement rates associated with such an action. Regardless it appears now to be government policy to mass infect the population with a rapidly mutating Class 3 Biohazard. For us it has meant no visits to dentists, GPs, specialists and hospitals unless absolutely crucial. Health care workers and hospitals have become spreaders of infection and Covid misinformation thrives due to the lack of science-based policy and gaslighting by successive governments. The lack of government leadership based on science has left a communication hole to be filled with misinformation by malevolent actors. Federal government communications are effectively nonexistent and as with the Morrison government, that void is continuing to be filled with misinformation. 1.3 State Governments: A lack of consistent messaging between states has been one of the major issues for the public. Four years into the pandemic and yet contradictory information abounds between States. For example, currently the NSW government advises a focus on hand washing (9 specific publications) - for an airborne virus! Meanwhile Victoria is clear about masking and even advising the virtues of respirators: https://www.betterhealth.vic.qG7.au/cor? iavirus-covid-19-victoria The State governments appear to have differing levels of scientific knowledge and as such, misinformation continues. 1.4 ATAGI and the TGA: The AHPPC, like the TGA is essentially unseen by the public. However, the TGA has a most crucial role. On the few occasions when John Skerritt was in public he engendered confidence in the agency, but when queried about approval delays, he also made it quite clear that the TGA was reliant on Government to “signal” its political requirements: https://www.thequardian.eom/w rld/2021/dec/31/a-scramble-how-australian-covernments- flipped-from-resistinq-i) ambracinq-covid-rapid-antiqen-tests Like the TGA, ATAGI has also clearly been politicised by reference to its recommendations versus those for the CDC, NHS, WHO and EMA for the same products and circumstances. ATAGI as an advisory body is very slow to provide its formal report on urgent Covid vaccines. For example, so far 6 weeks minimum for the XBB monovalent, with no value added to the TGA report and inconsistent with the WHO SAGE recommendations. ATAGI’s real benefit appears to provide governments with a political scapegoat for slow vaccine procurement, supply and distribution - regardless of its actual functional responsibilities. For example, the very slow approval for an XBB vaccine in 2023, that was being rushed into arms in other developed nations from September, meant for my family, an otherwise unnecessary extended lockdown until it becomes available. Approved belatedly by the TGA on 6th October - over 2 months ago, and no signs of any vaccines as yet, with the XBB variant infections rapidly increasing Australia wide. In the meantime, Mark Butler excuses his inaction saying that he must wait for ATAGI to make its recommendations. 1.5 Australian CDC: The potential introduction of an Australian CDC is most welcome, with the following comments: 1. It needs to take on the functional roles of ATAGI, TGA and AHPPC as well as responsibility for the National Medical Stockpile. 2. Senior appointments must be apolitical and seen to be so. 3. Advices must be published for the community with explanations and references. 4. KPIs need to be established for key items such as vaccine procurement. With performance to KPIs published. 5. The States and the Federal government need to agree on community messaging and implement accordingly. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0195 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0196 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0196.pdf COVID RESPONSE FEEDBACK: > Dangerous work practices like bed to bed transfers should be stopped by placing patients into electric beds that they remain in from Emergency. Bed to bed transfers add to nursing neck, disc, back, shoulder and hip injuries and are entirely unnecessary, with battery operated electric beds. Unnecessary bed to bed transfers continued during Covid, which was dangerous, as somebody was at the head of the bed, supporting the patient's head and neck. Wardies transferring patients on hydraulic trolleys place the 220kg capacity of these trolleys onto single knee and hip joints. No safety improvements occur after health worker injuries, as despite 80% of their working life spent lifting, bending and twisting around medical equipment, 74% of injuries are fraudulently dismissed as "degenerative" (Safework 2013 stats). WorkCover as an insurer misuses the medical term "degenerative," as this term also refers to the inflammatory mediators that flood to trauma sites after injuries. Degenerative means that the inflammatory deposits are visible on medical imaging to Radiologists and the medical definition cover post traumatic arthritis. > Most bed to bed transfers are done without hovermats, and no disposable hovermat sheet covers are purchased, so that the hovermats can be left under patients, to keep the patient's skin free of moisture, unless they are used in theatre, where patients over 90kg are routinely transferred over narrower trolleys to theatre tables. When wider bed to bariatric bed transfers occur, where the greater risk occurs, the hovermats are not available to clinical areas. > Health workers sustaining respiratory infections receive no compensation for pneumonias, when these infections are dismissed as "community acquired". Many health workers looking after people with respiratory distress have the infective bugs aerosolized by BiPAP and CPAP machines, when the cause of the respiratory distress is initially considered to be of cardiac origin. The most dangerous time for health workers is during intubation for ventilation, but nurses needing to get PICC lines in for their own antibiotics, after assisting with the intubation of infected patients, got their infections dismissed as "personal". CPAP and BiPAP machines aerosolize bugs 1.2 meters from the patient's head, so that even wardies pushing beds were placed at risk. > The purchase of dangerous non-stitched head bands for CPAP and BiPAP masks satisfies the budgets of business managers, while maiming Nurses. Nurses are repetitively bending and leaning over bed to prevent the strapped masks from migrating into patients' eyes. The non-stitched head bands of the masks should be stitched to prevent the straps sliding in hair causing patient eye and health worker bending injuries. > SafeWork do not provide feedback to workers sustaining serious injuries or infections. The SafeWork and WorkCover emphasis is on rejecting compensation and dismissing injuries and infections as personal, as the sleep deprived health workers are financially strained and vulnerable. With unfair AIRC processes permitting Interlocutory Applications to be filed to pervert the course of justice, like: (1) Onus of Proof 1995 legislation that cannot be satisfied with consultant opinions and MRI; (2) unscientific precedents like the Blackwood vs Toward 2015 decision that ignores the medical science around post traumatic arthritis and fraudulently exploits the medical term "degenerative", all costs are deflected to the workers, with no safety improvements required. (3) Workers on $25/hr cannot fund Lawyers costing $690/hr to challenge unfair AIRC processes, since they get no Legal Aid and are financially strained funding work injuries. (4) The Bundaberg Nurse was accused of being a "vexatious litigant" for an Interlocutory Application to be filed, to force her to withdraw her AIRC Application for re-instatement. Unless she withdrew her appeal, she would be liable for the legal fees of herself and the Respondent, as lAs are deployed to force the injured to impossibly defend that their injuries are not "degenerative", in a legal system that fails to recognize medical science. How can she be a vexatious litigant when her 4 serious permanent injuries were all substantiated by 4 MRIs. The Bundaberg Hospital was never held accountable for leaving her on full 12 hour clinical duties with a MRI diagnosed disc tear, on a 3 month spinal surgeon waiting list, until unable to walk. 7 medical requests for risk mitigation and rehabilitation support from the Spinal Surgeon, Pain Consultant and GPs were then ignored, subjecting this nurse to T1 surgical injuries, a significant risk of quadriplegia, and $20,000 medical gap fees she was left to self-fund with no compensation. (5) You cannot look at the Covid issues without looking at the fraudulent maltreatment of health workers, left maimed and bankrupted just from going work in a bullying toxic culture, hideously referred to as a "health" system. Using health funds to increase the lawyers employed by hospitals, employing Media Liaison and HR to generate propaganda, is not looking after health workers. In Australia, only Teachers get compensation, not the manual handlers, labourers and tradies, who are not willing to engage in corrupt insurer driven AIRC systems. > Nurses got 3mm kidney stones and severe headaches from dehydration when stuck in the Covid suits for 6 hour intervals, the duration of entrapment in Covid suits should not exceed 4 hours. > 50% of slide sheets used to shift patients should be different colours. Those on either side of the bed cannot determine if they are all lifting with the same sheet, when slide sheets are folded under bariatric patients. When staff on either side of the bed lift, are unaware they are lifting with different slide sheets, the patients move unpredictably causing nursing and wardie back, shoulder, neck and disc injuries. For the patients moving unpredictable, they are subjected to unnecessary procedures, when intravenous accesses, chest tubes and feeding lines become dislodged. > Many health workers who have injuries but are not infected, are denied their right to transition back to work on reduced hours. Those nurses and wardies wanting to transition back to work on light duties could assist their colleagues by answering phones, photocopying documents for aeromedical transfers, getting medications out to check, preparing infusions etc. However, the Qld Government denies all the risk mitigation and rehabilitation support in their Rehabilitation Guidelines, and prefers to have nurses and wardies remain home using accrued sick leave, rather than contributing to reducing the work of colleagues. Many nurses having to rest for minor injuries like to boost the morale of colleagues, by answering the phones, photocopying for transfers and reducing their paperwork. Instead they can only fraudulently return to work using "annual leave offered as flexible working arrangements", instead of accrued sick leave. Marking return to work staff on rosters as being on suitable duties plans would prevent unrealistic expectations. Instead suitable duties plans are denied altogether. Veteran nurses on return to work arrangements, could buddy with novices, until they gain their confidence, but instead they are denied suitable duties plans, and can only return to stressful full clinical duties full time during their injury recovery, or take "annual leave offered as flexible working arrangements" instead of sick leave to transition. > Work injuries are being deliberately extended by returning an aging workforce to non- ergonomic workplace designs, products, equipment and policies (bed to bed transfers), until they are left with chronic pain and disability. There is no sane reason why ventilators should be purchased with humidifiers 30 cm from the floor, for an aging gender diverse population, needing to chronically bend low to turn off alarms. ^38 197 o « w 7* Ji ——_ There is no reason why, the culturally and gender diverse, aging nursing workforce should have to chronically hyperextend over these infusion pump stations, to turn off alarms on ceiling mounted monitors, when the average nurse is 153-157 cm tall. When reporting injuries, the issues will be ignored by male OH&S Officers over 180cm tall, who will determine the needs of an aging female workforce without consultation. Why does the Government consider it reasonable for nurses to shunt furniture from bay to bay, just to get admissions? This hospital passes accreditation and OH&S issues with blocked fire doors for the most vulnerable critically ill patients in the hospital, by shunting furniture to external buildings when pre-warned. In November 2018, they actually got the ACHS award for quality and safety due to their spreadsheet illusions that do not translate to safety, for patients or staff as per blocked fire door on left. Imagine being pregnant having to get the equipment on the far wall in the bay below. This unit was evacuated 2 times for mold, then more OH&S attention was paid to the removal of cork notice boards, than the 4 areas where the floor scould not be cleaned. 5■S p To get this transport monitor from the above bays for a patient to go to Xray, CT Scan or theatre, that pregnant bellied nurse would need to navigate all the equipment in the above bay, then leave carrying the transport monitor obscuring her view of her feet, with all the leads and cables to trip over. 1000 nurses, wardies and auxiliary staff sacked during the pandemic was a disaster. Novices were panicking other novices, with no-one with experience available to show them what to do when sick leave spiraled. The skill mix of the work force is being dangerously diluted with university/hospital contracts. When hospitals commit to taking 100 new grads for placement in the next year, the veteran nurses are denied access to long service leave. If they want their long service leave, they are forced to resign, so that all their sick leave entitlements are wiped. This makes a full time position available for novices, with no experience or skills, to satisfy the university and hospital contracts. Experienced nurses with full patient loads, needing to accept admissions or facilitate discharges, are then stressed and missing meal breaks, when the novices dilute the skill mixes and need support. The aging work force is chronically maimed deliberately by non-ergonomic workplaces, as viewed below. To change these canisters daily, those aged 60 years have to get to floor level at the back of beds, twisting around ventilators, dialysis, echo machines and cables! Then chronically hyperextend to silence monitor alarms, but their injuries will be self-funded when dismissed as "degenerative". The only personal aspect of these injuries is the cost. Nurses and Wardies do not go to work to negative gear self-funding work injuries, fraudulently dismissed as personal. / / I RR interval —PRn TSTl- £ segrnenll segmenl £ P interval ’ -STiiterva Interval mm/mV 1 square = 0.04 bbc/D. 1 nV Despite the Credible Meds pharmacy list being available for patients with long QT syndrome, to prevent fatal arrhythmias, many hospitals are not putting in age and gender when doing heart tracings. When the risk of fatal arrhythmias and patients on anti-coagulants falling are entered on risk systems, the risks are dismissed because the "doctors can calculate the QTc". The doctors are % of the team here. The Pharmacists checking medication charts cannot calculate the QTc; the nurses giving out medication need to check the heart tracing QTc measurement to withhold medications like common antibiotics if the QTc exceeds 500ms. The risks to patients having sentinel events will not be reduced if this risk is chronically dismissed. p.lci hj'ilOOII I riiiar-raad r* i I* CMH rro-mT ip) SuccvDn Pswi (7 cm frigm r ip-| Subglottic suction catheters for endotracheal and tracheostomy tubes should be used to reduce the risk of lung aspiration of saliva. Only the Mallinkrodt brand is safe as the Portex ones get cuff leaks causing lung white outs. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0196 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0197 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0197.pdf So many credible doctors around the world warned that the covid jabs were not safe and effective. That has now proved to be true. I know so many people who have not had covid but have been majorly, adversely affected by the jabs. Two young children in the one family getting epilepsy within a week of getting jabbed. Many friends getting myo and pericarditis to varying degrees. Some still cannot work. I know 5 people who got Bells Palsy soon after the jabs. Two are still suffering to this day and can no longer work. I know dozens who got shingles and at the same time TV advertising campaigns were saying that one in three people would get shingles. I spoke to doctors and we all know that this has never been the case before the jabs. My mother in law died within a week of getting the second jab. A perfectly healthy lady. Out shopping at Bunnings and Mitre 10 one day and gone the next. My personal stories could go on and on. However worst of all, my mother died of a broken heart in a government funded nursing home without any of her five children being allowed in for months and months on end to see her. What an abomination and sad reflection on where our government is at in Australia. I am no longer proud of being called Australian. I personally chose not to take the covid jabs, (I'm not anti vax - I just went to Zimbabwe and in preparation took vaccines for Cholera and Typhoid) and I also chose not to wear a mask in public through the pandemic. Despite being with so many people (including family) who discovered they had covid within a few days of seeing them, I have never had covid, despite being tested each time. There is so much I could relate, except to say that the tyrannical government bullying went against all world human rights conventions and still did not achieve what the government was so confident in telling the public it would. Ie. I still have a video of the then health minister Roger Cook and our premier Mark McGowan saying that if you take the jabs you will not get covid, you will not pass it on and you won't die from covid. Something that was passed down from the WHO and repeated word for word by media and government officials in their scare campaigns all around the world. They were wrong on all accounts. Yes, people did die but they were mostly the old and vulnerable that could die from a flu anyway. An interesting fact is that the flu totally disappeared from the WHO statistics during covid. It was suddenly exchanged for covid. I have proof and pictures of this from the WHO website itself, in the early stages of the so called 'covid' pandemic. Evidence is out now too saying that many died as a result of the jabs and not from getting covid. I personally believe that there should be a Royal Commission into what happened in the last three years. Unfortunately our government will strongly discourage this and do everything in their power to not be held accountable, as they can never admit that they made a mistake, lest they be sued for millions and millions of dollars. Direct evidence of this is when the NSW government tried to pass a bill last year, directing that all companies on whom the government put pressure who in turn mandated the jabs to their employees, should compensate their employees who received adverse effects from the jabs, for the rest of their lives, even though they might no longer work for the company. What a massive cop out by the NSW government and proof/admission that the government was trying to pass the buck for something that was far worse and far reaching than what they could ever have imagined, in so many people dying and being affected by the jabs. The affects are still continuing to this very day. Not to mention the metal illnesses that were directly caused by the lock downs and now proving to be a way larger problem, costing the government millions of dollars. The only responsible thing for the government to do now, is to allow a Royal Commission hearing into what happened and why it happened, to prevent such a catastrophe from ever happening again, in allowing a foreign body (WHO), (who are a law unto themselves with no authority except which is given to them by undiscerning governments and mostly funded by non-medical interests) to dictate what should and shouldn't happen in what was, our great country of Australia. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0197 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0198 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0198.pdf Submission and evidence to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry 1. Australia updated its Pandemic Plan in August 2019. However, when Covid happened, the Morrison and then the Albanese governments did not follow that plan. What happened was not in that plan. Instead, we had massive lockdowns, school and places of worship closures, mass vaccinations and masking, to name a few measures. None of these measures were in the plan. My question for the Covid-19 Response Inquiry Panel is, why did we not follow the plan? How much money was spent on the Pandemic Plan? And was it money wasted? Might we want to consider following it if faced with a pandemic in the future? I think this is important as the measures that we did follow, based on advice from the World Health Organisation (WHO) clearly failed and we face a broken and impoverished society because of it. 2. It would be clear to the Covid-19 Response Inquiry Panel by now that Covid was engineered as a result of gain-of-function research. This was clearly documented in an article in the Australian by journalist Sharri Markson who provided proof that Covid was engineered as a result of gain-of-function research funded through America’s National Institutes of Health and its former director Anthony Fauci. The research was conducted in China because it was out of reach of America’s regulations, and it was cheaper. Gain-of-function research is supposedly so that health authorities can create new viruses and then an antidote or a vaccine so that if nature supposedly produces that virus, there will be a vaccine ready to go. 3. It concerns me that both the Morrison and Albanese governments have provided vaccine indemnities since the Covid outbreak. This means the bill to compensate those who are harmed by these products falls on taxpayers, not the pharmaceutical industry. There are 400 new MRNA vaccines under development to replace the off-patent conventional vaccines. Responsibility for harm from these products must rest with the makers, not the public. The emerging adverse events and deaths related to these productions is overwhelming and must be objectively examined and not simply dismissed. Can the Covid-19 Response Inquiry Panel please ensure this issue to properly scrutinised and the makers of these products be held accountable? What is in the contracts with the makers of these products that every Australian should know about? 4. What are the supports that are being considered for people impacted by Covid-19 and for those that have been harmed by the products I mention in point 3? Clearly, these products are harmful. And could the Covid-19 Response Inquiry Panel please ensure that the makers of these harmful products be held accountable for funding these supports? and I put it to the Covid-19 Response Inquiry Panel that these supports are clearly examined and explained to all Australians. Every Australian would be awaiting answers to these questions and more. Thank you for reading and publishing my submission, Bridget Green ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0198 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0199 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0199.pdf 9 December 2023 Robyn Kruk Panel Chair COVID-19 Response Inquiry I’m an academic within the School of Psychology at the University of Queensland. While I obviously have concerns about the mental health impact of pandemics, I’m writing as I’m more concerned about the psychological biases that make it hard for most of us to think clearly about the risks from pandemics. I think those biases will make it easy for us to prioritise the wrong things when we try to support industry and business (Terms of Reference #5). I also think it may lead us to under-value the most important types of health response measures (Terms of Reference #1) and preventative health measures (Terms of Reference #2). In short, our biases will lead us to focus too much on pandemics that closely mirror COVID-19, and significantly under-prepare for the risk of pandemics that are worse. The 'Availability' bias makes us overemphasise risks that easily come to mind like COVID-19, overshadowing less salient but more devastating threats.1 'Hindsight Bias' can falsely assure us that future pandemics will be predictable and similar to past events, leading to complacency. 'Scope Neglect' makes it hard for us to feel the difference between a pandemic with a fatality rate of 0.1%, 1%, and 10%,1 when the latter would cause a complete breakdown of civilization. 'Overconfidence' bias means our brains round down small risks of catastrophic pandemics to zero.1 We cannot round down a small risk to zero. A 1% chance each year of a pandemic killing 10% of Australia is an ‘expected death toll’ 25 times higher than our annual road toll.2 For these reasons, the federal government must focus on preventing catastrophic outcomes. I think it can best do that by supporting businesses and industry to: 1) create pandemic-proof personal protective equipment, and 2) invest in better indoor air quality. In the context of Terms of Reference 5, support for industry, including in the context of labour shortages, I recommend that the Inquiry consider the paper by MIT academics and the Geneva Centre for Security Policy titled “Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics”.3 The paper begins by unpacking ways that pandemic risk is increasing—in particular the possibility of engineered pandemics. The paper also makes a useful distinction between “stealth” and “wildfire” pandemics, which has deep implications for our policy response. Importantly, the paper goes on to explain that in a pandemic worse than COVID-19, workers who operate critical infrastructure may die or refuse to attend the workplace. If that happens, a modern interconnected society would rapidly collapse. The second-order consequences from a lack of electricity causing cascading failures in other critical sectors would far exceed the immediate consequences of the virus. Imagine your local hospital without electricity or clean water. When the Inquiry thinks about support for industry, the primary goal of that support should be keeping the lights on during a future, worse, pandemic. If critical infrastructure fails, other questions like financial support or community support rapidly become irrelevant or impossible. Among the various recommendations, Gopal et al argue that “pandemic-proof personal protective equipment” (P4E) is essential to dealing with the risk of failing critical infrastructure. The argument for P4E is that essential workers (such as those critical to providing food, water, power, law enforcement) need the confidence that they can continue to work without endangering themselves and their loved ones. The paper provides requirements for what this kind of equipment would need to look like. The paper also includes discussions about definitions of essential workers, ways of preparing the workforce and supply chain, and a discussion of social and technological approaches to slowing the spread of future pandemics. I recommend that the inquiry read Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics and treat it as a foundation stone for other recommendations.3 That is, our first priority has to be actions that take these worst-case scenarios off the table. Action against other elements of the terms of reference are only possible and impactful if we can be confident that we’re in a position to prevent a social collapse. I appreciate these risks are hard to imagine—many Australians won’t, or won’t like imagining them—that’s exactly why the federal government must take responsibility for preparing against them. Another key area the Australian government should invest in is better Indoor Air Quality (IAQ). Australians spend at least 90% of their time indoors and every year, Australians fall ill as a result of exposure to airborne pathogens while indoors. Worse still, respiratory transmission is a primary transmission route for pandemics. Therefore, reducing respiratory transmission will not only result in less illness for Australians but also safeguard us against the next pandemic. In addition to proven approaches and technologies, there are promising, effective, and scalable interventions, such as Ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI), which Australia could be supporting in the hopes of deployment before the next pandemic. The Lancet COVID-19 Commission Task Force has proposed Non-infectious Air Delivery Rates (NADR) as measurable goals for ventilation and filtration targets that protect against infectious disease transmission. Air delivery rates to different sized rooms can be compared using the normalised measure of Air Changes per Hour (ACH)-the number of times the volume of air in a room is exchanged with fresh, pathogen-free air each hour. Ventilating a room with fresh outdoor air while exhausting air in the room reduces the concentration of pathogens in the air produced by the room's occupants. Filtration and disinfection technologies can achieve comparable effects to ventilating a room with fresh air can be measured by Equivalent Air Changes per Hour (eACH) - the number of ACH required to achieve the same reduction in pathogen concentration. Traditionally, air changeovers are achieved through opening a window or having an HVAC (Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) system installed. The Air Safety to Combat Global Catastrophic Biorisk report summarises the cost-effectiveness of different mechanical IAQ interventions.4 A modern HVAC system costs $135 USD per ACH, assuming it is updated to current standards for filtration and air delivery rates. However, many buildings do not have an HVAC system installed and are often not ventilated-schools, cafes and restaurants, homes, and smaller and older workplaces are just some examples of poorly ventilated spaces that we visit every day. Modern HVAC systems can be expensive or difficult to retrofit into buildings but represent an important step towards delivering non-infectious air. However, there are more cost-effective technologies that are easier to retrofit and could be widely adopted to keep Australians safe and healthy indoors. One example is portable air cleaners using HERA filters which are estimated to cost approximately $110 USD per eACH and are simple to retrofit into buildings that are unsuitable for HVAC. Ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI) is the use of ultraviolet light to inactivate or kill pathogens such as bacteria, fungal spores and viruses. UVGI lights in indoor spaces could decrease the number of pathogen particles in the air in a safe, scalable and simple manner. Upper room UVGI lamps use 254nm wavelength UV light to sterilise the air in the top of rooms as it circulates and cost approximately $14 USD per eACH. Far-UVC lights are a newer innovation that can bathe an occupied room in far-UVC wavelengths.5 It uses a shorter wavelength of 222nm, which appears to be safe for skin and corneas yet it still inactivates the comparatively smaller pathogen particles.6 Unlike other interventions, Far-UVC has potential to reduce short range and conversational distance transmission and sterilise surfaces, in addition to reducing long-range airborne transmission like mechanical ventilation, portable air cleaners and 254nm UVGI. It is estimated to cost $15-46 per eACH, however, still requires additional R&D to make it cost-effective and scalable. Given that we have a mix of proven approaches for a variety of buildings and promising technology, I believe Australia should be investing in the deployment of what we know works and the research and development of what we know is promising. UVGI technology has the potential to make all indoor environments safe for Australians to occupy without fear of respiratory illness at an affordable price. Through supporting research and development in this technology, Australia can lower the burden of respiratory illness and protect against the next pandemic. It can also leverage the opportunity to become a world leader in developing technology that will no-doubt be in demand later. It might seem strange for a psychologist to be recommending technical solutions to a biological problem, but our track record shows these solutions are higher leverage for governments. We can't persuade people to drive safely all the time—we mandate all cars have seat belts, and enforce laws that all people use them. The risk of any one of us dying in a car accident is small—as is the risk of a truly catastrophic pandemic—but both are large enough for the government to take responsibility for addressing the risks. The government can save thousands of lives by enforcing road standards and laws—it could save millions of lives by preventing a catastrophic pandemic. The government will need to provide fewer mental health services to victims if it can prevent the next pandemic in the first place. Technical solutions like better pandemic proof personal protective equipment, and better indoor air quality, are evidence-based solutions the government has at its disposal, among other strategies outlined in the reports cited here. Overall, I hope the government does its best to overcome the biases that cause us to naturally underestimate catastrophic risks and focus its efforts on this kind of security. Yours sincerely, Dr Michael Noetel PhD, M App Psy, SFHEA Program Director, Master of Psychology School of Psychology The University of Queensland Brisbane Qld 4072 Australia 1. Yudkowsky E. Cognitive biases potentially affecting judgement of global risks. In: Bostrom N, Cirkovic M, eds. Global Catastrophic Risks. Oxford Academic; 2008. doi: 10.1093/OSO/9780198570509.003.0009 2. Fatalities data. Office of Road Safety. Accessed December 9, 2023. https://www.officeofroadsafety.gov.au/data-hub/fatalities-data 3. Gopal A, Bradshaw W, Sunil V, Esvelt KM. Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics. Geneva Centre for Security Policy; 2023. https://www.gcsp.ch/publications/securing-civilisation-against-catastrophic-pandemics 4. Kieinwaks G, Fraser-Urquhart A, Kraprayoon J, Morrison J. Air Safety to Combat Global Catastrophic Biorisk. 1 Day Sooner; Rethink Priorities; 2023. https://rethinkpriorities.org/publications/air-safety-to-combat-global-catastrophic-biorisks-revised 5. Welch D, Buonanno M, Grilj V, et al. Far-UVC light: A new tool to control the spread of airborne-mediated microbial diseases. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):2752. doi: 10.1038/S41598-018-21058-w 6. Hessling M, Haag R, Sieber N, Vatter P. The impact of far-UVC radiation (200-230 nm) on pathogens, cells, skin, and eyes - a collection and analysis of a hundred years of data. GMS Hyg Infect Control. 2021;16:Doc07. doi:10.3205/dgkh000378 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0199 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0201 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0201.pdf COVID-19 Response Inquiry I work in the Information Security sector and lost my job in April 2022 despite having worked remotely for that employer, a superannuation firm, since March 2020. I originally started at that firm in August 2018 and had an excellent work record throughout that time. From March 2020 onwards the firm insisted that staff WFH (Work From Home) so I went to considerable effort to ensure I was just as effective from that location. I even researched and shared best practices on managing geographically dispersed teams. Over a period of almost two years the firm continued to praise staff for their WFH efforts and stated that people were just as effective there as when they were in the office. I was one of the few who was happy to return to the office in late 2020 as part of a Pilot run (we were in-between lockdowns at the time and no government mandates existed which would have prevented staff from attending a workplace). With the return of lockdowns and subsequent mandates I was no longer able to attend the office and resumed WFH 100% of the time. In late 2021 / early 2022 the superannuation firm started saying that remote work was no longer effective and that all staff must prepare to return to the office on a partial basis. This directly contradicted what management had been saying since March 2020 with regards to how effective remote working had been. And so they required that all staff consent to two injections each. No alternative options or arrangements were permitted, not even a negative RAT test was considered acceptable. Ironically enough as soon as staff started returning to the office in late 2021 / early 2022 there were almost weekly emails about multiple confirmed COVID-19 cases in the office. So vaccinated people with COVID-19 were allowed into the office while unvaccinated people with a negative RAT test were not permitted to come into the office. During that time my direct manager was VERY supportive of my situation. Unfortunately, the directive seemed to be coming from a much higher level (outside of the Information Security team) so it felt like no meaningful discussion or consultation was going to take place. The CEO specifically stated that he was "on the right side of history" in terms of forcing the mandate at the firm. At no time did my employer perform a COVID-19 Vaccination Risk Assessment for my team. I asked about this many times but they repeatedly stated that no such risk assessment existed. From November 2021 through to April 2022 I was placed under extreme pressure to accept two Provisionally Approved Vaccine injections. During this time I felt that I was being victimised, harassed and excluded. Because I did not consent at that time to be injected my employment was terminated in April 2022. Both during and after this ordeal I was extremely stressed and felt anxious all the time, which had a severe effect on my mental health and overall wellbeing. Before being terminated there was constant coercion from some of my co-workers to "just get it". When my employment was terminated, I was left feeling humiliated, worthless and utterly disposable. I have never in my life experienced such coercion in a workplace, especially when there was in existence a government acknowledged mitigating control of producing a negative RAT test. My employer constantly refused to accept this as one of the possible options despite the fact that my role does not involve dealing with customers face-to-face. They were intransigent in the extreme (you must return to the office, a negative RAT test is not an option, you must be vaccinated). I truly felt as if I were being driven mad by a company mandated Kafkaesque policy. My self-confidence and sense of self-worth has taken a hit that I don't think I'll ever fully recover from thanks to that employer's actions. What makes it worse is that the firm has now, as of October 2022, lifted their mandates and no longer require staff, contractors or even casual visitors to be vaccinated. They simply ask that anyone feeling unwell should stay home (which is what any reasonable person would do). So all that fuss and damage done, only to reverse their policy six months after terminating my employment. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0201 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0203 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0203.pdf Submission to the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry Introduction: I am a mid career healthcare professional working as a intensive care paramedic. As a concerned citizen who experienced significant post-vaccination side effects, I am compelled to submit my testimony to this Inquiry. My intention is to share my personal narrative and highlight critical issues related to the healthcare system's response to vaccine adverse reactions. I believe my experience sheds light on systemic challenges that must be addressed to ensure a more patient-centric and equitable approach to future public health initiatives. Detailed Account of My Experience: Following my first COVID-19 vaccination with Moderna, soon after I developed moderate chest pain (5/10) radiating towards my shoulder. This unexpected symptom caused significant alarm and prompted immediate contact with emergency services. The urgency of my condition was evident, leading to prompt referrals to a cardiologist. Despite undergoing extensive investigations, including stress echo and serial ECG assessments, definitive diagnoses remained elusive. While the tests revealed borderline troponin levels, the persistent pain and lack of conclusive explanations have had a profound impact on my mental and physical well-being. My confidence in my cardiovascular health has been significantly eroded, leaving me with lasting anxieties about my future health. Analysis and Connection to Inquiry's Terms of Reference: My experience resonated deeply with the Inquiry's focus on assessing the effectiveness and fairness of the Commonwealth's COVID-19 response. The dismissal of my concerns regarding the potential link between my symptoms and the vaccine reflects a broader systemic issue within the healthcare system. This dismissal exemplifies a concerning lack of individualized care and a tendency to downplay patient experiences, particularly when it comes to reporting adverse reactions to vaccines. This undermines transparency and trust in public health initiatives, potentially discouraging individuals from seeking necessary vaccinations. Recommendations: To address these concerns and ensure a more equitable and patient-centered approach to future public health interventions, I propose the following recommendations: 1. Individualized Assessment of Vaccine Reactions: Any adverse reaction, regardless of severity or perceived rarity, should warrant a thorough investigation and individualized assessment by qualified healthcare professionals. This personalized approach allows for the identification of potential risks and ensures that patient concerns are heard and addressed appropriately. 2. Recognition of Natural Immunity: Prior COVID-19 infection should be recognized as a valid form of immunity, offering equivalent protection to vaccination. This acknowledgment empowers individuals and promotes informed decision-making regarding vaccination, particularly for those with concerns about potential side effects. 3. Mandatory Reporting of Vaccine Concerns: To enhance transparency and improve data collection, healthcare providers should be mandated to record and report all patient concerns about vaccine side effects. This data can play a crucial role in identifying potential safety signals and informing future vaccine development and rollout strategies. 4. Transparent and Comprehensive Clinical Trials: Fostering greater transparency in clinical trial reporting, including the publication of anonymized individual-level data, is essential to building public trust and facilitating informed decision-making regarding vaccination. This increased transparency can address concerns surrounding potential biases and promote a more inclusive approach to vaccine research and development. Conclusion: My experience signifies the urgent need for a healthcare system that prioritises patient-centered care, transparent communication, and individualized assessments, particularly when it comes to public health initiatives. By acknowledging the realities of vaccine side effects, implementing the proposed recommendations, and actively engaging with patients, we can cultivate a more empathetic and inclusive healthcare system that prioritizes the well-being of all individuals. This shift is crucial not only in restoring public trust in vaccination programs but also in shaping a more equitable and effective approach to managing future public health challenges. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0203 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0204 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0204.pdf Covid Inquiry-Jane Dempsey I was a full-time grade one teacher in the Northern suburbs of Melbourne in 2021. Due to the covid vaccine mandates, which I refused to take, I lost my job. It was my first year of teaching as a mature age graduate. I was devastated at not being able to teach for 9 months. This included social ostracization, no pay and my holiday pay was also denied. No-one should ever have to choose between protecting their health and their job and means of earning a living. These vaccines have no evidence of long-term safety and have caused harm (and death) to so many people who took them. Australia's excess death rate is up at nearly 20% since 2021 - and this is not from covid deaths. This needs to be investigated. In terms of future pandemic preparedness - mandating vaccines should never be applied again. It did nothing but cause division and suffering. The vaccines did not stop the spread of covid or even reduce symptoms. The unvaccinated did not clog up the hospital system - in fact we are the healthiest ones now. We did not suffer excessively when we contracted covid. I hope you will consider these points and ensure that Australia does not have to go through such dark times again. Thank you, Jane Dempsey ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0204 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0206 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0206.pdf I worked in a large public hospital prior to and during the initial 'COVID outbreak', the lockdown stages, and the rollout of the COVID injections. After two years of being forced to remain absent from my workplace, I had my employment terminated last month on the grounds of serious misconduct. Serious misconduct. For not wanting a medical procedure. As a woman in remission for breast cancer, I had valid reasons for not wanting to compromise my immune system with the COVID injection. I went to my doctor in an attempt to receive informed consent: he told me he was unable to discuss the adverse events with me. The pressure applied by AHPRA on our doctors to stay silent about what they were seeing, must be investigated. In my role, I had access to the Emergency Department presentations. It was clear when the injections were first rolled out that many people were suffering serious adverse events: these were routinely documented. Within a month or two, any reference to any patients' recent injection status was removed. This could only have occurred as a directive from management. Why was this done? Why was transparency removed? This must be investigated. I have a number of friends and relatives who required heart investigations within 24 hours of having a COVID injection. Each one of them was told the injection was not the cause, when it was obvious it was. This culture of lying to patients must be investigated. Within the hospital, many, many staff were still contracting 'COVID' despite having received the recommended injections and boosters. Despite this clear indicator the injections were not working, they were - and still are - mandated. Why? This must be investigated. One of the training modules in South Australian public health is 'Speaking up for Safety' where we are told we must speak up if we see a potential safety risk: it is our duty to do so, and we would not be honouring our contract, and the public sector's Code of Ethics, if we didn't. It is ironic that when so many staff did speak up about the unsafe injection, they were silenced and/or forced to remain away from their workplace when opting not to have the (proven) unsafe course of injections. Ignoring the concern of medical staff - staff who were seeing firsthand numerous adverse events that presented regularly and on a daily basis - must be investigated. Was there even a pandemic? Had the seasonal flu been publicised, magnified, and treated in the same way 'COVID' was, would we have seen the similar case numbers and outcomes? Where doctors were told to note COVID on patients' charts if they simply showed a positive test result, where 'dying with COVID' was counted as a COVID death, where a PCR test that wasn't fit for purpose found many, many false positives, one could argue there was simply no pandemic. And numerous medical and scientific experts have argued just that. This must be investigated. There has been a significant increase in excess deaths in Australia, and in other heavily COVID­ injected countries. These excess deaths only began occurring once the injections were rolled out. Yet there seems to have been very little regard for accurate record-keeping of the injection status of those who died, and the relevance of the time of death. This must be investigated. The rollout of the COVID injection was a clinical trial, the largest we have ever seen according to then-Health Minister, Greg Hunt. People should have had the option not to participate, as is the case with all clinical trials. Instead, Australians we were put in the position of risking the loss of their job, their career, their home, family relationships, friendships, and their sense of security and safety. Australians who refused the injection were made to feel like second-class citizens, potential murderers, selfish, stupid. No one should ever be coerced or manipulated into having any medical procedure, as is stated in the Australian Immunisation Handbook. Why were immunisation providers allowed to ignore this human right? Why were basic human rights to bodily autonomy overlooked by so many? This must be investigated. It is very important that this inquiry investigates the following: ■ corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts - there should be full transparency ■ mask mandates - the outdated research that was used to justify mask-wearing; current research that shows mask-wearing is largely ineffective as well as being dangerous to health ■ lock downs - reasons we were locked down when this goes against previous pandemic planning ■ PCR tests that were purposely cycled at high rates, knowing the outcome would show more COVID cases ■ vaccine mandates - how these gene therapies were largely and widely mandated when it was clear from the outset they do not stop transmission, do not stop someone from catching coronavirus, and do not stop hospitalisation ■ official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission; the 'safe and effective' mantra that was a clear lie ■ vaccine injuries - the adverse event ration is huge ■ media censorship ■ silencing of doctors - trust in doctors is at an all-time low ■ the role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors - this must never happen again ■ the poor treatment of victims - the gaslighting. The COVID inquiry must be a full, well-intentioned, and objective inquiry. It must not be undertaken with any agenda or desired outcome. It must expose the many shortcomings that have clearly occurred. The outcome must not be used as a tool to further remove our bodily autonomy or human rights: it must serve to strengthen them. It is unconscionable that our government sold out our health, trust, autonomy, and safety to the pharmaceutical companies. Evidence is growing rapidly to show our government knew these products were unsafe and ineffective. It is time the government admitted it got many (most?) important aspects wrong. As with the recent Thalidomide apology (which pales in comparison to the COVID response), it is time to say sorry to Australians for the largest medical^^^^^^^^^^^^^M ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0206 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0207 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0207.pdf I DEMAND a Royal Commission for FULL investigation ! It is needed to gain inside into the dealings of government officials with the vaccine manufacturers and expose all relevant information about the true incurred cost and future cost. It is needed for the investigation why were vaccine mandates imposed and caused immense harm to the long term health of many Australians and immense costs to our economy It is needed for the investigation why there was the disinformation about the vaccines (being effective and safe instead of advising public to be cautious due to the experimental nature of the vaccines and no external quality control). It is needed for the investigation and prosecution of the government officials implicated in silencing doctors and experts critical of the "official narrative" and offering alternative paths. It is needed for the investigation and prosecution of the government officials responsible for censorship of doctors through the powers of AHPRA and ATAGI ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0207 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0210 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0210.pdf To whom it may concern, Thank you for taking submissions from people impacted by the government’s COVID-19 response. My family and I were impacted by being made to wear a mask in public, which made it more difficult for us to breathe. The scientific journal Nature has in July 2022 published researched showing that virus particles are too small to be blocked by masks, so masks do not keep out unwanted particles. However, masks do provide an excellent breeding ground for bacteria and fungi, both benign and pathogenic. Direct link to this research here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-15409-x If you are ever tempted to require mask wearing again, please realise that this is detrimental to everyone’s health and is of no use against viruses, and instead encourage people to avoid wearing masks. Since the doctors were discouraged from giving vaccine exemptions, my husband who has had heart arrhythmias had to choose between an experimental CO VID-19 vaccine with a track record of causing chest pain, heart palpitations, and other heart problems, or quitting his job. Please, in the future, do not allow businesses to force employees to choose between experimental drugs and their work. Every person was impacted in one way or another by the government’s response to COVID-19. Please launch a Royal Commission to determine how to handle any future pandemics in a healthier manner. Regards, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0210 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0214 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0214.pdf A Covid Inquiry from the Office of The Prime Minister and Cabinet with submissions to be submitted by December 15th is clearly a deliberate, intentional complete whitewash. As a citizen of this country I strongly request a Royal Commission for a proper investigation into; corrupt vaccine procurement, secret contracts; mask mandates; lock downs, vaccine mandates, government state and federal over reach and coercion with employment vaccination. Official misinformation and media censorship, censorship of citizens especially with doctors. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0214 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0215 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0215.pdf A controlled "covid inquiry" is totally inadequate and will be a waste of taxpayer dollars. There should, instead, be a proper Royal Commission for a full investigation into: - possible corruption in vaccine procurement and secret contracts; - mask mandates; - lock downs; - vaccine mandates, - official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission, - vaccine injuries; - media censorship, - silencing of doctors and nurses, - the roles AHPRA and ATAGI played in censorship and oppression of doctors, and - the poor treatment of victims. Only a Royal Commission can deliver the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Without the whole truth, nothing useful can be discovered or uncovered, and the same mistakes would be repeated. A "Covid Inquiry" can easily be manipulated and is only whitewashing lip-service - we need a Royal Commission instead. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0215 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0217 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0217.pdf Many Australians including myself became stranded overseas due to the International arrival caps imposed on returning citizens to Australia. There were no travel alerts or advice in place when I left on the^^^^^^^^^|lt was upsetting to feel the resented from other Australians due to the negative way international arrivals were being portrayed by some politicians and the media. Australians stranded had not been drinking cocktails on beaches we were people that have been working or attending to our families, good people that didn’t deserve to be treated with such contempt. My passport says I can pass freely without let or hindrance and it afford me every assistance and protection I may need, yet arrival caps deliberately made this difficult. The state leaders were given far too much power by the Federal government sadly dividing Australians by their state; G2G passes for WA with people camping at borders, Queensland hospitals for Queenslanders etc. Whilst the initial response ofclosing borders and quarantine was imperative to stop the spread of the virus this continued for two years even though there was new data on the virus as well as vaccines. Other countries progressed Australia did not adapt at all just continued to follow China’s zero Covid policy which also eventually failed. The world had a new endemic disease. The airlines were offloading economy passengers in favour or business class tickets and were holding people to ransom with prices. Citizens were forced to pay for their own quarantining even though the Bio Security Act Section 108 clearly states it is a Federal government responsibility. Unfairly the State and Federal government have pushed many Australians into emotional and financial hardship. Then there are those that still haven’t paid, whilst some of us were passed on to debt collectors and were asset tested why..? Shouldn’t we all be treated the equally? Not penalised. Hotels used for quarantine were not fit for the purpose, no fresh air, poor hygiene, poor food, lack of exercise and Vitamin D all which are imperative for one’s physical and mental wellbeing. Celebrities, some not Australian, were able to quarantine at home and sportspeople had access to outdoor spaces. Politicians should be ashamed of this inequality; they wonder why the voting public don’t trust them anymore. The repatriation flights were full the moment the emails were received, yet most Qantas planes were mothballed whilst receiving a financial support package from the government. I registered for repatriation and was not helped at all; there was no system in place to progress, it became a lottery. Australians that had left after the pandemic started or who had not lived in Australia for 10 years+ got flights before me. I was astonished by Mark McGowan’s suggestion to use the detention centre on Christmas Island, would he send his wife and daughter there!!! Australian citizens are not illegal immigrants or criminals; thank God the Federal government had some sense on that ugly proposal. DD 9/12/2023 Page 1 I own a house my primary residence, my personal belongings, my car etc. were all in WA all unattended and vulnerable for a year causing me a lot of anxiety and many sleepless nights. The McGowan’s government was happy to continue to collect my council rates, water rates, vehicle road license etc. all for services I was unable to use whilst paying second living expenses trapped overseas through no fault of my own. If he really cared about Western Australians, as he so often claimed, he could have use his surplus budget to prioritise getting western Australians home or built an adequately ventilated quarantine centre within reach of hospitals. Oh wait! He did...... after the pandemic .never been used. We are a country built on migration, living in a globalised world; the lack of compassion for people who had family, sick and dying relatives and funerals across closed borders was truly heart breaking, cruel and unnecessary. After finally returning to Australia my mother in law became sick. We could not go through the mistreatment and expense of flights and forced quarantine again. My husband had to say goodbye to his mother via Videocall and watch her funeral online all whilst Scott Morrison had a beer and a BBQ in Cornwall, UK at the G7 summit looking up the ancestors he’d never met, whilst depriving others from seeing their families for two years. I am confident no lessons will be learnt from the international arrival caps and feedback from the 40.000+ Australians abandoned overseas and the 200,000+ that endured quarantining begging for balconies and adequate ventilation. Our Quarantine experience was far from the Gold standard the state leaders claimed. It took 3 hrs to get us from Perth airport to the city which is 20 minutes away, the flashing blue light police convoy was totally unnecessary, we are not criminals and after PGR testing before boarding flights also not positive. There was no system of prioritizing elderly or young children, no water available and no social distancing our safety was of no importance at all. After a further 2 hours sat on a hot bus waiting to be checked in I collapsed from dehydration. My husband had called for help and had asked for water, the Police failed to help anyone their only response was to threaten to handcuff anyone who they perceived as complaining. I was laying in the gutter in Perth CBD being treated by the hotel medical team and was wheeled to my room on a porter’s trolley, I was ashamed of my Country and those employed to protect us..! Hotel rooms were not designed for two week stays or infectious disease control. They did not have provision to store or prepare food so being told by staff that friends can drop off care packs is pointless and even those were searched! Washing up of plates and cutlery had to take place in the bathroom sink, where in our case the sink was way to small and the toilet had no closing lid very impractical and unhygienic. Our room consisted of a table with two hard chairs and a TV that could only be viewed from sitting on the bed. I’m in my 50’s and my husband 60’s sitting on a bed was not comfortable, manageable for a city break but not 2AI7 living for two weeks. DD 9/12/2023 Page 2 Rooms were in an enclosed corridor with no ventilation so any airborne virus could be transmitted within the hotels. Returning citizens were being called "travellers" and blamed when someone got infected when it was the hotel system that was at fault. As the hotels were used solely for quarantine there was no reason why an allocated hour of outdoor time in a restricted supervised area such as a roof terrace was not achievable. New Zealand managed they understood that the virus was not transmitted outside providing social distance was maintained and that Vitamin D was vital for a healthy immune system. We eat a health balanced diet yet we had to put up with carbohydrates and sugary food daily, pasta, rice and No fresh vegetables. The food arrived luke warm, whilst I barely ate my husband did but at a cost of two lots of food poisoning and severe diarrhoea. Being in an enclosed unventilated room, washing up in the bathroom with a husband with diarrhoea was not pleasant or hygienic. We went in to quarantine healthy and came out unwell; no one gave a damn about us, appalling treatment. It was scary losing all of my Freedom and Human rights. Knowing that Murderers and Rapist were getting fairer treatment was a bitter pill to swallow. Then we had forced Vaccination in WA with Job losses and public segregation. The vaccine did not prevent the individual from getting or transmitting the virus. An unvaccinated person could NOT buy a coffee or go in shops but could walk through a shopping centre to get their groceries. The senseless rules implemented by government just did not add up. Yes I am vaccinated. Our State leaders had more power than the PM of Australia! Both State and Federal leaders had an inability to have a balanced debate and tell the truth even if it was uncomfortable. This has led to government saddling the next two generations with billions in debt not to mention what emotional damage has been done. Small businesses, tourism, some individuals and our international reputation have all been damage. Trust in our government, Police and our hospital systems are all in question. The World Health Organisation statistics show that every country whether they lock down, quarantined, closed borders or abandon their citizens have had the same outcome. Less than 1% of each country’s population died of Covid, most of which were elderly or had another health conditions. Of course those lives were important and that is where the focus and protection should have been, we had that information within the first year. Covid became about power, political popularity and winning votes not the science or health advice which was so often said but certainly not followed. Has the response caused more damage than the disease? If politicians and those conducting these inquiries can't be honest about what we got right and what we got wrong we will just do it all again and will have learnt nothing. DD 9/12/2023 Page 3 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0217 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0219 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0219.pdf Dear Sir, 1. There MUST be a ROYAL COMMISSION into ALL aspects of the pandemic in Australia, covering Federal & State; 2. The Australian government MUST NOT sign the WHO Treaty to give away Australia’s SOVEREIGNTY GIVEN THE WHO IS unelected & controlled by China; 3. What are the exact CONTRACTS the Gov signed with vaccine manufactures & did they waive liability for manufactures; given the huge number of vaccine injuries individuals MUST be able to sue Gov & manufacturers; 4. A Royal Commission MUST look into ILLEGAL vaccine mandates; they crippled industries & small businesses AND the Government workers were exempt; how unfair can it be? 5. The Governments, (Federal & State) & Health officials told LIES every day, OFFICIAL MISINFORMATION about vaccines, that it stops infection & transmission; OUTRAGEOUS! 6. The Government kept changing the goal posts to suit new misinformation from local & overseas Sources; 7. It was disgusting that Doctors & experts were SILENCED by the Government, AHPRA & ATAGI; I spoke with many Doctors privately & they said they would be disbarred if they spoke publicly; they know better than the public servants; e.g Murphy could not say what a “woman” was & he is chief Medical Officer; 8. People like the Premiers of Vic, Old & WA acted appallingly & MUST be held accountable. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0219 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0220 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0220.pdf Covid-19 Inquiry Submission 9 December 2023 Thank you for the opportunity to represent this. There are political, economic, medical and moral factors at play. I apply contextual theology as a moral force and develop a reasoned argument for God's call to confront and dismantle this dangerous imbalance of power over the people of Australia. For a very long time, the last "Covid-19 pandemic" death in Victoria was fixed at 30 November 2020 (the 820th) and the second last death recorded was 28 October 2020. The first two so called Covid-19 deaths of 2021 were both recorded on 1 September 2021 (a useful time marker). From that date the numbers began to increase markedly. From then until exactly a year later to September 1, 2022, a total of 4,505 deaths were added to the initial 820 of 2020. What does that say for anyone with a brain, given that the jab roll-out began around January of 2021, especially given that the majority of those dying had received one, two or three poison doses? It's glaringly obvious that people who were jabbed had their health compromised by this medical intervention. Another year went by (to September 1, 2023) and an additional 3,057 Victorian so called Covid- 19 deaths have been added to the covidlive.com.au site (Vic). These deaths are very likely disconnected to the 997 reports to the TGA, those that are myocarditis deaths and other "sudden" deaths after the jab. If we add the original 2020 Covid-19 deaths (which I argue were mostly through ineffective and dangerous hospital protocol interventions and/or otherwise deaths blamed as caused by Covid-19) to these later Covidlive.com.au and TGA stats, to September 2023, we have 9,379. Also, be aware that jab related deaths are under-reported, so these numbers must me greater still. The Australian Bureau of Statistics "released a report of mortality statistics and showed that from January to July 2022, there were 17% more deaths (16,375) than the average expected for these months." These are real people, family, friends, tragically lost, many in their prime of life. For the ABS article: https://theconversation.com/thousands-more-australians-died-in-2022- than-expected-covid-was-behind-the-majority-of-them-196281 My source for the Covid-19 death numbers https://covidlive.com.au/report/daily-deaths/vic All this is akin to mass genocide. A great public awakening and the resulting action for justice will reveal that the injection, whatever the brand, is anti-health and anti-life. What is happening is truly an evil of the highest order and our Government and the legacy media are complicit in it. God has said "Vengeance is mine". I pity those in Government and MSM who knowingly perverted the truth. This is a world wide deception. I believe that we are living in a "fraud of unprecedented dimensions". To support this belief I have only to refer to a 2021 court ruling in Portugal where "a Lisbon court forced the authorities to provide verified COVID-19 mortality data", which showed "the number of verified COVID-19 deaths from January 2020 to April 2021 to be only 152, not about 17,000 as claimed by government ministries". https://beforeitsnews.com/eu/2021/06/lisbon-court-rules-only-0-9-of-verified-cases-died-of- covid-numbering-152-not-17000-claimed-2673922.html There were determined and brutal efforts to suppress Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine which have both been used successfully in treating patients with Covid-19. Therefore there was NO need to resort to a totally experimental injectable mRNA "device" that dangerously reproduces spike protein toxins in many organs of the body and causes auto-immune disorders. If the injection was ever to be approved it had to pass a very thorough testing protocol. The link just below is one 1 engaging story of how knowledgeable doctors hit the wall of censorship and opposition when trying to save their patients with the safe and well accepted (but out of patent) drug Ivermectin. For those of you who prefer a peer-reviewed research paper on Ivermectin you might find the second link below strongly convincing. I'm sure that we could find many similar stories surrounding Hydroxychloroquine. https://www.mountainhomemag.com/2021/05/01/356270/the-drug-that-cracked-covid https://www.medicalpressopenaccess.com/upload/1605709669_1007.pdf Australian State Governments extended their so called emergencies to create intermittent lock­ downs after reporting on conveniently inflated spikes in "cases". They needed to continue the emergency measures in order to keep public fear "stoked-up" and to roll out the experimental injection of a substance which has never been proved safe for use in humans! Our governments relied on these emergency "constructs" to carry out this medical poisoning on their unsuspecting and trusting constituents. People who took these experimental injections risked death or a serious injury to their health. As a result, many trusting people are killed or now medically compromised and will live a shorter lifespan. Truthful medical experts attempted to warn society of the dangers and their warnings were systematically censored or ridiculed. This so called pandemic is complex and has many layers to sort through. There is suppression of successful Covid-19 treatments by the mainstream media who relentlessly pushed a highly dangerous "countermeasure", a technology to change people's DNA and medically compromise them for life. There is the suppression of the expert witness, and instead we got lies from the puppet politicians and their bureaucrats who have acted in fear and/or embraced power and wealth. There are the pharmaceutical companies and major corporations who are benefiting financially through this hyped up crisis which they actively invest in to keep this gravy-train going. There is the disastrous pollution the world over from scientifically proven as useless disposable face-masks. There exists the secret contracts and hidden payments into government coffers and corporations alike. The complicit judiciary has turned a blind eye. https://www.thehealthsite.com/news/covid-19-vaccines-can-cause-sudden-cardiac-deaths- warns-expert-calls-for-its-withdrawal-from-market-942361/ In the case of the South African Apartheid crisis, there were 700 deaths recorded from the Soweto uprising during 1976 and 1977, and only then did good leaders rise to take a stand. Yet the deaths from the mass poisoning inoculations we are witnessing at present in Australia is at least ten times this number when true statistics are finally released. The States have perpetrated violence against their populations with "industrial level" coercion, forcing people to accept the poison needle through fear, deception and reprisals such as "no jab no job". To quell public protest, they arrested and detained those who rallied publicly against their narrative. The state directed the "corporate" Police to enforce their measures with a level of brutality not seen in Australia for many generations. This overreach against ordinary people ought to be enough to jolt society into action. People are called to speak out fearlessly but are afraid to do so. The State could harass and cancel their security, their registrations! But we must remember always that God aligns with the oppressed and suffers alongside them. Society will find God in the confrontation and not in the church pews. The state created an apartheid system in Australia and any courageous stand against it will take on a life of its own. This will be a God supported high- profile confrontation against corrupt governments, so needed at this present moment. The enemy of freedom is relying on our weakened resolve. The satanic enemy's ultimate goal is to totally destroy humanity, so what have we to lose if we stand up to be counted? When human "rules" are based on a fake narrative we are obliged to push back. The obvious deaths and injury resulting from the Covid-19 injections ought to be enough to convince society that "enough is enough". A new wave of God's prophets are now raising their voice. A prophet stands in 2 God's courtroom and makes an appeal. In past times they called out their leaders over abuse and corruption and many suffered and died as a result. Our modern governments have resorted to violent methods of coercion and won't admit the error of their ways, so today's prophets risk abuse, even martyrdom. With the censorship powers of corrupt media, governments are ignoring the prophetic voice and pushing on with a WEF led puppet master agenda to enslave the world. We can expect vicious responses when these dark hearts are challenged with righteous resistance. To undermine push-back they "promote" Police brutality and "whisper" that they might deploy the military. If necessary they will destroy all opposition, and detain without trial, but this will only increase the outcry for justice and freedom. The globalist elite foreshadow their evil plans by publicly advertising their intentions, in the sense of petitioning in God's court for approval. For our part, we simply counter this by speaking directly into the same courtroom, a privilege given to us through Jesus' victory on the cross. God waits for Jesus' siblings (us), evoking the name of Christ, to call out the plans that Satan has taken thousands of years to bring to fruition. We are called to pray out this false prophetic endeavour. As prosecutors in God's courtroom, as children of God, we have the victory over evil once and for all. According to covidlive.com.au, the pandemic narrative remains clumsily propped up in order to fan fear and postpone, for as long as possible, criminal indictments for this attack on humanity. We must critique these stats with wisdom and care to allow for misinformation, especially given that tests for "cases" are never able to be truthfully diagnostic. As sovereign children of God, we are permitted to engage with our Creator Father in the same way that Jacob struggled and won a safe future outcome (Genesis 32:24-28). Jacob left nothing to chance and changed history by altering the projected tragedy. We are called to contest alongside God in the same way. Another great biblical figure, Job, who lost everything, held his ground and maintained his personal petition until God altered his perspective with more powerful reasoning. While we may have to "repent in dust and ashes" (Job 42:5-6), we are called to make the world a better place, warts and all. On the strength of all the above, I demand a Royal Commission for a full investigation into the so called Covid-19 Pandemic response in Australia and its consequences at governmental, corporate, medical and judicial level. Within this, I want the vaccine acquisitions and secret contracts with vaccine manufacturers exposed. I want the vaccine mandates and the justification for the so called health "orders" to be thoroughly investigated. I want the official misinformation about vaccines blocking transmission to be exposed for all to become aware of. I want to know the full extent of vaccine injuries. I want to know why doctors have been silenced and some even deregistered for prescribing successful off-label medications. As you can see, I am very concerned, as we all should be, and a Royal Commission is definitely called for, one armed with the power to subpoena appropriate agencies along with any "whistle-blowers" who come forward with full assurance for their protection. Thank you for reading my submission. Robert Ackland. 3 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0220 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0223 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0223.pdf What a hopeless set of terms of reference for this inquiry. Surely this inquiry is a whitewash. I am not fooled, nor happy. Where is the Royal Commission to do a real job with relevant terms of reference? There is no allowance to consider real issues including: 1. Corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts 2. Frustration of the approval process for the only Australian company to produce a real (protein based) vaccine, and that was effective (Vaxine Pty Ltd, SA) 3. Media and politician misinformation and lies regarding the ability of approved vaccines to block transmission 4. Significant vaccine injuries 5. Demonization, silencing, censorship and oppression of doctors who dared speak out against the approved vaccines 6. WHO mismanagement ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0223 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0224 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0224.pdf From March 2020-June 2023 The Governments handling of the Pandemic was atrocious, provide the following reasons to substantiate this. I lived in Melbourne VIC witMm^amily under^^^^^Dan Andrews, Labor Government who incited^^^^Htowards the people by the Police and Military. My^^^l and I attended various peaceful protests in and other areas during which time I witnessed Police/Military being instructed to: 1. Shoot peaceful protesters with rubber bullets 2. Intimidate and harass public citizens taking a walk without masks even though they were social distancing 3. Road-block major highways and motorways to restrict travel and movement during the pandemic 4. Kettle, pepper spray and arrest peaceful protesters in forceful manner 5. Military knocked on my door to check if were isolating in my home 6. Turn Victoria into a Totalitarian State. Other incidents I witnessed in VIC during the^^^^^^Bincluded: • Medical apartheid - Vaccinated VS Unvaccinated____ • Unvaccinated labelled as Conspiracy Theorists by ^^^Hoan Andrews publicly during conferences • Unvaccinated prohibited from entering restaurants, movies, medical centres, public places without showing a valid vaccination cert. • Businesses brought to their knees and closed their doors permanently due to unnecessary extended lockdowns implemented by ^^^Hoan Andrews. • Social Media Censorship / Shadow banning - profiles, comments and posts removed/deleted. Fake accounts and Bots deployed to shut down discussion/opinions. • People being arrested for exercising their right to freedom of speech. • Novak Djokovic held in a hotel and banned from playing the Australian Open. Poor immigration system who tried to embarrass an unvaccinated elite athlete. That backfired! The Federal and State Governments, Minister Gallagher/TGA, APRHA & ATAGI must be held responsible for their role in this^^^^^^H also: 1. They all advocated for People to take a Covid Vaccine that is safe and effective as publicly announced through various media channels. This is NOT true it is a lie - the vaccinated suffer the most infections. 2. The TGA, APRHA and ATAGI maintained their lies that the Covid Vaccine will stop infection and transmission - this did not happen even after jab #4 or #5. 3. APRHA forced Medical Professionals to push the vaccine onto their patients in the name of Public Health. They silenced, interrogated, cancelled and deregistered Medical Professionals who did not advocate for the Covid Vaccine based on their patients histopathology and other medical conditions. 4. The ingredients and potential side effects of the vaccines were not allowed to be openly discussed between Medical Professionals and patients nor was this information made available to any patients. 5. Big Pharma Manufacturers were given indemnity for any vaccine injuries - this was not disclosed to the people of Australia. 6. The slogan in Victoria was "Keep your family safe", "Keep your grandparents safe", "Keep your community safe" what a load of^| 7. When questioned on the efficacy of the vaccine Minister Gallagher and other Bureaucrats refer to the "Commercial in Confidence" Contract with Big Pharma therefore do not answer any questions with clarity or certainty. The People of Australia want these Bureaucrats held to account, trialled and imprisoned for their complicit involvement with harming the Australian People for Profit. These Bureaucrats are answerable to the People of Australia, our taxpayer funds pay their wages! If they cannot answer these questions then they should have their wages reduced to NIL while they are held on Trial for CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY. All the Premiers who resigned during and after this must return for Trial and prison sentences also. The people of Australia want a Royal Commission for a proper investigation into; corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts; mask mandates; lock downs; vaccine mandates, official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission/infection, vaccine injuries; media censorship, silencing of doctors, the role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors, and the poor treatment of vaccine injured victims. The role of the Federal and State Governments, TGA and Health Ministers in advocating for a Trial Vaccine that indemnifies the manufacturers. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0224 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0225 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0225.pdf Page 1 of 1 Please report on mask mandates; lock downs; vaccine mandates for travel, state border checks, check in app to enter shops, doctors, dentist, suppressing ivermectin, TGA corruption/dysfunction official misinformation and lies by politicians & officials, and by the media regarding the severity of the virus, effects, cases vs deaths, inducing fear and panic, ability of vaccines to block transmission, hiding extent of testing of vaccines, hiding that vaccines were not vaccines as people usually understand, hiding what is in the vaccines, politicians directing health, instead of doctors vaccine injuries and deaths; media censorship, silencing of doctors, the role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors, and the poor treatment of victims. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0225 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0226 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0226.pdf Covid 19 enquiry. In the entire year of 2020, not a single soul in our circle knew anyone afflicted by Covid-19. There wasn't even a whisper of someone who knew someone who had heard of someone with the virus. When the powers that be declared a pandemic, the masses were left clueless, grappling with the inexplicable chaos that ensued. The media, operating in a relentless hysteria for three long years, terrorized the population. Hospitals became no-go zones, thanks to a protocol mandating the use of Remdesivir, a notorious experimental drug with a deadly reputation. Trust in the media has plummeted to rock bottom; scepticism now shrouds every news report. People have awakened to the harsh reality that all levels of government, regardless of political affiliation, betray the public trust and cannot be relied upon. Any rational individual scoffs at the government's lockdowns, restaurant closures, border shutdowns, business closures, travel restrictions, mask mandates, and church closures. Adding insult to injury, those in power exempted themselves from the vaccine mandates, further fueling public outrage. Families have been torn apart by government-imposed divisions, with most succumbing to the pressure and getting vaccinated, while the dissenting few are treated as pariahs. The adverse effects of the vaccines are apparent within my own family—my wife enduring a near­ death experience after her second shot, and my daughter grappling with ■■■■■■■■■■■I Even my brother, initially resistant, succumbed to coercion, only to meet an untimely demise mere months later. The impact extends to my grandchildren, with two unseen due to the tumultuous circumstances. Schools, once pillars of education, now act as enforcers of medical decisions. My youngest grandson was coerced into vaccination; his entry into school was contingent on compliance. Legal action looms on the horizon, targeting the school, government entities at all levels, and medical professionals involved, invoking the Nuremberg Code that demands the death penalty for those administering experimental drugs through coercion. The fabric of our society has unravelled beyond recognition. Regardless of affiliation, political parties dance to the WHO and WEF tunes, rendering them indistinguishable—the police force, once protector of the people, has morphed into a tool of oppression. We now see them as rather than guardians of public safety. Any hope for a genuine inquiry into these atrocities is quashed by the very government responsible for this crime. The prospect of justice seems bleak, as the investigation is tainted by the criminal hands that orchestrated this nightmare. The very essence of life in our country has been irreversibly altered, leaving us grappling with a dystopian reality crafted by those who were supposed to safeguard our well-being. James Jones ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0226 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0227 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0227.pdf Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry - Public Submission 10.12.2023 Terms f Reference: Key health response measures (for example across COVID-19 vaccinations and treatments, key medical supplies such as personal protective equipment, quarantine facilities, and public health messaging). Not So 'SAFE and EFFECTIVE’ (10 mins, read) SUMMARY Safety warnings ignored by the Commonwealth, Health Depts./Ministers etc. including TGA (and AHPRA etc.) following the publicly available European Medicines Agency Assessment Reports Evidence from EMA website (3 links & HHreport image) listing identified safety risks & missing information (no data). Research 910 reported TGA DAEN cases of reactions (88% children affected) including 43 cases deemed "Serious" as per TGA FOI4769 (published 17/11/2023). Reported child jab deaths - all listed on TGA DAEN and TGA FOI 3545, FOI 4077 and FOI 4769. GOVERNMENT PUBLIC DATA (DAMNING EVIDENCE OF JAB HARM). Currently 139,579 adverse reactions cases listed on TGA DAEN following COVID-19 jabs from 21/12/2020 to 25/11/2023, including 5,863 cases reported of Australian children aged under 18. ReferTGA DAEN website as evidence. ,005 reported jab deaths on DAEN consisting of approx. -/*£**" m BTGA DAEN https://daen.tga.gov.au/medicines-search/ Of these 1,005 COVID-19 jab reported deaths, |9 child reported deathj aged from 5 -17 (5 boys and 4 girls). See page 3. Researched links as evidence of revealing public Government data on TGA FOI Disclosure Log (FOI 3545,4077 and 4769). JAB SAFETY WARNINGS IGNORED The TGA (Therapeutic Goods Administration) provisionally approved the COVID-19 vaccinations, which were developed and manufactured at 'warp speed' within approx. 9 months; whereas most vaccines take years for approval i.e. study trials, long term data and safety assessments etc. For example, as from the 1st July, 2023, the TGA approved release of a vaccine, called ^^^^for Australian babies aged 6 weeks old. It was initially assessed by the European Medicines Agency in their report dated 17th December 2015, despite there being 7 baby deaths reported in the trial ("All vaccinated Subjects"). Refer page 124 as evidence of baby deaths plus safety concerns, identified risks and "Missing information" pages 128-130. The COVID-19 global trial experimental vaccines were also assessed by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) with reports in early 2021, prior to the TGA giving "provisional approval' ahead of the jab rollout in Australia. Alarmingly, these 3 publicly-available reports showed SERIOUS safety concerns with important identified risks e.g. anaphylaxis and "Missing information" (no data): • “Use during pregnancy and while breastfeeding • Use in immunocompromised patients • Use in frail patients with co-morbidities (e.g. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, chronic neurological disease, cardiovascular disorders) • Use in patients with autoimmune or inflammatory disorders • Interactions with other vaccines • Long-term safety". As researched evidence, see 3 x EMA assessment report links and 2 uploaded reports (highlighted pages - quick scrolling) as part of submission. See page no's for key information. Safety concerns image | ^pT0L202^^Dage^8^3^5^7^^7^^5^U^W^wit^4^^143 "Summary of safety concerns”, 166,168 and 172. ■ 19.02.2021 - pages 30 & 115 "Biological", 55 (genotoxicity & carcinogenicity risks), 56, 68, 94 (only 5 study participants of the elderly aged 85+), 97 (Pfizer trial ends Dec. 2023) and key page 115 "Summary of safety concerns" with "Missing information". See screenprint over as evidence of EMA report page 115 i.e. a table showing risks identified. 1 10:05 am Sat 21 Oct -=■ 72% gt)' A ema.europa.eu 115 of 140 2.7. Risk Management Plan Safety Specification Summary of safety concerns The applicant has submitted an RMP including the following summary of safety concerns: Important identified risks Anaphylaxis Important potential risks Vaccine-associated enhanced disease (VAED) including Vaccine- associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD) Missing information Use during pregnancy and while breast feeding Use in immunocompromised patients Use in frail patients with co-morbidities (e.g. chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes, chronic neurological disease, cardiovascular disorders) Use in patients with autoimmune or inflammatory disorders Interaction with other vaccines Long term safety data Risks considered important for inclusion of the summary of safety concerns The review of available safety data, including post-marketing data emerging from use in the UK and US, the experience with biological products and other vaccines leads to the conclusion that anaphylaxis is an important identified risk for^^^^^^lThis safety concern will be followed up via routine pharmacovigilance activities and in the planned and ongoing safety studies and reported in the monthly summary safety reports and PSURs. Any important potential risks that may be specific to vaccination for COVID-19 (e.g. vaccine associated enhanced respiratory disease) should be taken into account. The Applicant has included VAED/VAERD as an important potential risk and will further investigate it in the ongoing pivotal study and a post­ authorisation safety study. Missing information Since pregnant and breast-feeding women were excluded from the study, no information is available for those populations. It is agreed to include use during pregnancy and while breastfeeding as missing information in the RMP. At the data cut-off of 14 Nov-20, 10-14 weeks safety data are available. Thus, long-term safety is included as missing information and will be characterised as part of the continuation of the pivotal clinical trial and the PASS. Interaction with other vaccines, has not been evaluated in clinical trials and may be of interest to prescribers. As elderly individuals will be one target group for vaccination, and they often may need vaccination with other vaccines such as influenza and pneumococcus vaccines, further data is Assessment report EMA/707383/2020 Page 115/140 Following the the very first 4 reported cases involving Australian children, with adverse reactions (jab harm), are publicly listed on the TGA DAEN (government data) https://daen.tga.gov.au/medicines-search/ 1. 520591 - 25/02/2021 ^ged 17, Femal^, Syncope [loss of consciousness, fainting/ blackout], 2. 5235K - 1/03/2021 aged 15, Male, Chest pain, Dyspnoea (breathing difficulty), Electrocardiogram abnormal, Pericarditis [inflammation of the pericardium, a sac-like structure that surrounds the heart], 3. 524950 - 22/03/2021 aged 1, Male, Cough, Dyspnoea, Exposure via breast milk, Wheezing. 4. 526666 - 25/03/2021 aged 9, Female, Headache, Myalgia [muscle pain], Product administered to patient of inappropriate age. 2 FOI 4077 is a publicly available pdf document (5 pages) released 21/12/2022 under the TGA Freedom of Information Disclosure Log https://www.tga.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-12/foi-4077-01.pdfThis pdf shows 194 rows of COVID-19 vaccine reported deaths in Australia from 10/01/2022 to 08/11/2022, but only 20% show batch numbers/doses with the associated TGA DAEN case numbers. Notably, on page 3 of this FOI 4077 pdf, it reveals 2 reported deaths @ row 96 case no. 733723 and row 99 case no. 734187 - BOTH these 2 death cases show the FOI 4769 was released on 17/11/2023 and shows 946 pages on a pdf document issued by the TGA on their Disclosure Log. https://www.tga.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-ll/FOI%204769.pdf The first 437 pages relate to DAEN COVID-19 vax "Serious" cases (including deaths reported). There are 22,000+ DAEN case reports listed (various COVID jabs) from 21/12/2020 to 19/10/2023 (FOI 4769). From pages 438 to 946, C-19 vax batch numbers and doses are listed from 16/01/2022 to 19/10/2023 (where shown). ; shown in hundreds of cases reported in FOI 4769. Also, the 2 deaths reported following^^^^^^^^^^^^^H highlighted in r : above, are also included in this FOI 4769 i.e. page 786 of 946 shows case no. 733723 (Dose 2 batch no. FP1430) and page 789 of 946 shows case no. 734187^listed on the TGA DAEN, are shown below in an excel document (screenprint), amongst the current^^^^^Dc^ reported child deaths; sourced from TGA DAEN government website (accessed on 09/12/2023). The 2 jab reported death cases (5.2022), are 2 boys, f3723 is a 10-year- old boy who got dose 2 of FP1430 and ^3418 is a 5-year-old boy (the youngest Australian child jab death reported) wh got the same 2 young boys whose deaths were reported following the | ^^^^^^^^^^^areincluded within the TGA's FOI 4769 list of "Serious" cases. out of 910 reported jab adverse report cases on the TGA DAEN, there are 43 "Serious" cases listed i.e. 42 children aged 4 to 12 and 1 teenager aged 19. Via FOI 3545 and FOI 4769, there are 910 cases relating toT which 798 cases (88%) are on the TGA DAEN with reactions (kids aged 0 -14). Underreporting factor also applies. Not so 'safe and effective'. Case number port entry date Medicines reported as bei MedDRA reaction terms Death (Y/N) Batches & Doses Batch confirmed by Headache 17 Male Malaise Yes Yes FF0884(1) FOI 3545 Viral myocarditis Brain injury Cardiac arrest Dizziness Encephalitis 647663 20/10/21 14 Female Yes Yes 3005842(1) FOI3545 Headache Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome Nausea Pyrexia______________________________ Adverse event following immunisation 695048 15/1/22 15 Male Yes Yes FOI 4077 Head banging Cardiac arrest 719838 Male Yes Yes -(1) FOI 4769 A FOI 4077 Generalised tonic-clonic seizure 724023 Female Cardiac arrest Yes Yes FOI 4769 A FOI 4077 733723 6/5/22 10 Male Adverse event following immunisation Yes Yes____ FP143O (2) FOI 4769 A FOI 4077 Abdominal pain Cardiac arrest 734187 10/5/22 Male Yes Yes FP1430(l) FOI 4769 A FOI 4077 Eosinophilia Eosinophilic myocarditis 744306 11/7/22 14 Female Immunisation reaction Yes ___ Yes unknown (1) FOI 4769 A FOI 4077 Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia 762472 20/12/22 Female Escherichia sepsis Yes Yes -(2) KOI 4769 & FOI 4334 Vomiting E( VTIONS - Key health response measures (COVID-19 vaccinations & public health messaging). 1. Stop the fearmongering of COVID. Start changing public health messaging from wrongful narrative 'safe and effective'. 2. Stop giving "provisional approval" a.k.a. 'back-door' access to Pharmaceuticals via the TGA. Start with adopting a 'safe passage' procedure and being thoroughly vigilant with reading assessment reports, studying trial information and long-term safety data of vaccines (and medicines). NB. as rejected in USA as an unsafe product 1960's. 3. Stop all conflict of interests involving funds being given from 'big Pharma' to TGA and Governments etc. 4. Stop giving legal indemnity to pharmaceutical companies. Change the conditions or refuse these commercial contracts that have bound up the Commonwealth (including 'rogue' State/Territory Governments). Ensure proper and easier compensation channels for the jab-injured and families of the jab-deceased; with transparency and compassion. 3 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0227 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0230 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0230.pdf COVID-19 RESPONSE INQUIRY Greetings I work at a state school providing student wellbeing support, and have done so for more than nine years. In late 2021 my cousin died after receiving a covid-19 vaccine. I watched his funeral online. I contacted my local federal member who assured me that vaccines would not be mandatory. My employer then informed me that I was required to have two doses of a vaccine before returning to work. We now know that these vaccines neither prevented contraction of the disease or transmission of the disease. Broader health and social supports/ Governance: Health and support workers were banned from providing essential services, at a time they were most needed, because they believed their own health was at risk from a mandated vaccine! Please don't do that ever again. Key health response measures: Trusted local doctors were threatened then legislated against for using their expertise in treating their patients with safe and trusted medications! Rather than broad based health and wellbeing advice, the government dictated a very narrow fear-based mantra, so the community had little idea of how to manage the contraction of the disease. My students educational and social progress were severely disrupted by 'lock-downs'. thanks for considering this submission regards ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0230 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0233 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0233.pdf To whom it may concern. The Royal Commission is needed to investigate the following Covid/vaccine related issues: * Elaborate disinformation/misinformation campaigns over Covid 19 "pandemic" instigated by government, * Censorship of true information that was inconvenient to government policy, * Illegal lock downs, * Forced mask mandates, * Censorship of true Covid/vaccine related information, * Vaccine mandates, * Exceedingly high death rates after the forced Australia wide vaccination. We have been administered two doses mainly of the experimental gene therapy masquerading as a 'vaccine'. A great tragedy has been inflicted on this country in the favour and profit of minority. This must be investigated! Yours faithfully, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0233 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0234 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0234.pdf Detention especially isolation of the elderly and family separation, prevention of access to oxygen, coerced injection of substances, censorship of facts, repetition of fear propaganda, among other measures enforced by Australian representatives and public servants contravened Australian and international laws and basic science (let alone common sense), and has resulted in serious adverse social fractures and detrimental health conditions as personally witnessed, especially in aged care. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0234 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0235 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0235.pdf Submission for Covid Enquiry 1. We demand a Royal Commission for FULL investigation 2. 2. We want transparency regarding acquisitions of vaccines and secret contracts with manufacturers 3. Why were illegal mandates made compulsory so people lost their jobs? 4. Why official MISINFORMATION was spread about vaccines? It is known now to be neither safe, nor effective? 5. Why are there no autopsies or inquiry into vaccine injuries? 6. Why are doctors and world experts silenced by media and governments around the world? 7. Why did ARRHA de-register doctors who spoke the truth? Speakers and world experts are still censored - refusing the right to speak the truth. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0235 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0236 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0236.pdf RENAE SUTTIE - "COVID 19 Response Inquiry" Submission. I am a self-employed professional musician of over 32 years. I have never been out of work nor applied for government financial assistance during this time, except for during the Old Covid 19 lockdowns in 2020 which resulted in my being out of work for 6 months. The impact of this also resulted in us having to shift house. As someone who chose not to take part in the experimental Covid 19 vaccination, the divisive Qld government vaccination mandates of 2022 resulted in my losing 6 months' worth of work; being replaced on all my contracts and productions; being ostracised from society; losing friends; being excluded from family and social events; the inability to travel freely or attend public places; tarnished professional and personal identity; having my personal medical details and values made public; and ongoing trauma and mental health issues. This has also resulted in my no longer trusting the government or the media and ceasing to listen to or read the news as of 21st May 2022. (The day of the latest federal election). While society tries to quickly move on and rebuild their lives from the havoc and devastation caused by the government's response to the Covid 19 pandemic, I will never forget the trauma my family and I and other Covid 19 unvaccinated people experienced and continue to deal with on a daily basis. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0236 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0238 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0238.pdf I DEMAND a royal commission for a FULL investigation into the: • Illegal vaccine mandates. • Expose corrupt vaccine acquisitions and SECRET contracts with vaccine manufactures • Vaccine injuries • Silencing of Doctors and experts • AHPRA and ATAGI's censorship of Doctors • Loss of jobs due to mandates • Official misinformation about vaccines ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0238 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0239 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0239.pdf Covid-19 submission 1.1 DEMAND that a Royal Commission be called for a FULL investigation of all parties involved 2. I expect all documents be exposed for the aquisition of covid vaccines and contracts made between the government and vaccine manufacturers 3. Mandates forced on people by State Premiers to be vaccinated to keep their jobs must be exposed as illegal especially when the PM said that no one would be forced to be vaccinated. 4. Exposure of the misinformation by Govt, Main stream media and public figures that the vaccine was "safe and effective" when it never stopped transmission and has done more harm and killed people than the total of all vaccines ever used. 5. Vaccine injuries have been rampant with denial from authorities. 6. Doctors and experts have been silenced or ignored so that the government narrative wasn't jeopardised 7. AHPRA (AN UNELECTED BODY), has silenced all health care workers by sending a letter threatening them with disciplinary action or deregistration if they spoke out against the government narrative. How is this allowed when Doctors have always had the doctor/patient confidentiality. 8. Exposure of the fear campaign that has been thrust upon the Australian public so that vaccine hesitancy is allowed 9. Failure of the government to admit that the majority of people had NO reason to be subjected to forced vaccination as this coronavirus was not a threat to their health 10. The government should be held accountable for the failure to allow early intervention using Vit D, Vit C, Zinc, Hydroxychloriquin and the Nobel winning cheap and effective Ivermectin. Instead, these items were banned so as to make people think that the vaccines were the only answer. No natural health alternatives were ever recommended to boost a person's immune system 11. Failure of the TGA to properly assess a drug that was new and their failure to ban it when there was a huge increase in deaths and harm. We have all been lied to regarding everything to do with Covid-19 and the Government sits back and acts as if "there's nothing to see here"....shame on them 111 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0239 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0241 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0241.pdf • Key health response measures (for example across COVID-19 vaccinations and treatments The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) seemed to pick and choose the most wild and frightening vaccinations to approve - such as new and untested methods of vaccination, including MRnA, while not supporting methods of vaccination that had been safely used for years such as protein based vaccines. Even now the one approved protein based vaccination is not approved as a booster. The TGA only approved imported vaccines. Why not focus on Australian made vaccines? We left ourselves open, as a country, to financial concerns by doing so. Although this enquiry is only about federal government decisions, it can not be denied decisions made by the Federal Government including the TGA, impacted state government decisions. This decision impacted me financially in my work. • Financial support for individuals (including income support payments). I personally did not feel safe to have these not fully tested vaccines. It was the federal government's body, the TGA, that decided which vaccines we were to have. This impacted the state government's decisions about people having to have these vaccinations in order to be able to work. Based on this I was no longer able to come to the work place in my state government role and had no income for many months. I understand this was a state based decision but Blind Freddy can see the decisions are interlinked. I could not then apply for Centerlink because I had a job, but I could not attend that job because I had not had the federal government approved vaccinations. As an older woman, who has already spent much of my life caring for others (ie children/parents), and therefore not getting paid, and not getting super during those times, having more unpaid time in my life due to Covid responses by government, has of course put me further behind male counterparts in terms of how I will live and support myself financially in retirement. I would have course rather worked than claim Centrelink, but I did not have that option. As I get older and^^l my work options are extremely limited now as I have not had the approved vaccinations. I have had another experimental vaccination in order to support Australian research and businesses but that will not help me financially as my work options are so limited not due to TGA decisions. I understand I am not the only one, but this is one person's experience. Other The lockdowns called by state governments also impacted me in how I could care for The hysteria across the nation created through the responses by government also impacted my family relationships. I understand the Federal government doesn't see this as their responsibility but there can be no denying federal government responses influenced state government responses. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0241 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0242 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0242.pdf Call for submissions and evidence to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry https://www.pmc.gov.au/covid-19-response-inquiry/consultation As a concerned Australian citizen, I call for an immediate Royal Commission into the mishandling of the COVID pandemic by our elected Government and our non-elected Government bureaucrats. Ares of concern are: 1. Corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts 2. Vaccine mandates violating our basic human rights 3. Official misinformation, disinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of the vaccines to block transmission and prevent infection 4. Suppressed data regarding vaccine injuries and deaths 5. Media censorship of alternate viewpoints to the official science 6. Silencing of Doctors and the mis-treatment of hospital inpatients following suppression of clinical studies showing alternate treatment methods 7. The role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of Doctors 8. The poor treatment of vaccine injured victims Regards, 10 December 2023 ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0242 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0243 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0243.pdf As an elector and Australian born citizen. I demand that a royal commission be held to address the following issues. * corrupt vaccine procurement * secret contracts with vaccine companies * mask mandates * lockdowns * vaccine mandates * official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission * vaccine injuries * media censorship * silencing of doctors * the roll of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors * the poor treatment of victims To build a relationship of trust with the Australian public these matters need to be addressed with a Royal Commission ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0243 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0244 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0244.pdf I am a clinician and researcher, that worked for, but does not represent^^^^^|and I am commenting below relative to particular items from the Term ; c Refer ice. Governance: > There was and continues to be a lack of consistency between the federal and state governments. For example: o Data reporting between states was inconsistent, with NSW Health being the only one to release a more detailed (yet flawed) data report. o Some state governments such as QLD, WA and TAS have removed all mandates for the COVID-19 vaccines but other state governments such as SA, NSW and VIC have not - despite all CPHO's from each state sitting on the AHPPC and experts in some states saying they are no longer justified Solution: a nationally consistent approach should be used, incl federal laws and Policy > There was, and continues to be, a lack of transparency from Commonwealth, state and territory governments, national governance mechanisms and advisory bodies. For example: o A number of Freedom of Information (FOI; or such) requests have had to be made to gain information that should be publicly available. This includes FOI's showing the AHPPC knew there was no realistic ability of the COVID-19 vaccines to achieve herd immunity and in fact that the vaccines were not sterilising/neutralising (which they cannot be for a respiratory virus). This information was not made available to the general public - in fact the public were told the vaccines would "stop the spread" and to "protect your grandma" etc - which was never true or possible. o FOI's to particular areas have also not been allowed as these areas have been considered as under "Parliamentary Privilege" or such - this is not appropriate for transparency and creates mistrust. o The contracts (paid for by tax payer's dollars) have not been made available. o A FOI had to be made in SA to access vaccine safety surveillance data showing Chest Pain as the 2nd most frequently reported symptom following vaccination - this is consistent with the WA annual reports for 2021 (5th most frequently reported) and 2022 (1st most frequently reported) (which were publicly available, again highlighting inconsistency). In another FOI, SA Health stated this data goes automatically to the TGA. However, this high frequency of Chest Pain reporting was not disclosed to the public, whereby only symptoms such as headache, fever, muscle pain, fatigue and nausea are listed on any government site, including the TGA, as common. The Product Information Statements of the vaccines include chest pain as an indicator of possible myo- or peri-carditis with information further below relating to subclinical myocarditis and the potential for all people who are vaccinated to sustain an increased troponin indicative of cardiac damage. o There was no transparency of data, for example people admitted to hospital 'for' versus 'with' COVID where NSW reporting acknowledged someone might be admitted following a car crash but be tested and found to have COVID-19 despite the knowledge that you can test positive for at least 90days. Further, once data was looking less favourable for vaccinated individuals, the data reporting changed or was removed, or simply was not reported acutely by vaccination status in the first place. Issues such as not classifying someone as vaccinated for 14 days were known, which influences the data outcomes whereby there may be an increased risk in that early phase post-vaccination to people either catching COVID-19 or requiring hospitalisation associated with the vaccine. Solution: ALL information and data should be publicly available and not require FOI (or other) to be able to ascertain information or be blocked/not permitted. More appropriate/accurate data collection should have been planned and completed. > National governance mechanisms, such as National Cabinet and AHPPC, failed to review or appropriately consider scientific information presented to them raising concerns, including that presented by experts in their respective field. The Precautionary Principle was not applied to the COVID-19 vaccines (it was only applied to the risk of COVID-19 itself). There was also no consultation with experts and clinicians outside of the bureaucracies ^^^^|did not consult with clinical experts in immunology, vaccinology or other). Solution: ALL material sent to or alerted by any member of the public, or medical professional or scientist in their field should be appropriately reviewed, openly welcomed and considered with robust discussion to inform decision making by such bodies. Selection of material or persons should not be limited to government affiliated persons or sources only. The Precautionary Principle needs to be applied to proposed solutions, particularly where new and essentially untested (including for long-term issues). > Under NO circumstances should AHPRA (position statement) be able to restrict any medical professional from doing the role they are trained to do - that is reviewing scientific information independently and making their own informed decisions with regards to their patients AND/OR informing the community more broadly, as well as informing other regulatory bodies such as the government, AMA, RACGP, TGA, ATAGI or state health organisations. Evaluation and reporting of information by medical professionals should be encouraged and supported, not restricted or threatened. Many doctors stated they were "petrified" of being reported but would comment they knew the "jab" was likely contributing. In early to mid-2021 hospital medical documentation included statements like "stroke post COVID-19 vaccination" but with time this documentation changed to avoid potential issues. Further to this, ATAGI and the CPHO's of each state or territory should NOT be allowed to dictate the exclusions / exemptions for patients they have not personally assessed - that should remain solely with the treating medical practitioner. Solution: The AHPRA Position Statement should be removed and/or amended, and no such statement applied in future. Regulatory bodies should welcome and encourage medical professionals to report and inform them about issues without potential retribution. Exemptions should sit solely with the treating medical practitioner. Key Health Response Measures: > Public Health Messaging: Broadly speaking the response to COVID-19 was mis-guided and mis-informed, with a failure to take into account relevant key scientific literature, leading to biased, unbalanced public health messaging. A fear-based narrative was used to drive compliance with 'Health' response measures that were not proportionate to the overall risk, and/or overstated the benefits of actions such as lockdowns, mask wearing and vaccination. The infection fatality rate of COVID-19 has always been such that younger (<75yo) and healthy people without significant co-morbidities were not at significant risk - this was not represented in the Public Health Messaging, which wrongly also stated things such as "2 weeks to flatten the curve" which was again unlikely in a respiratory virus situation. Solution: Public messaging should create a sense of trust and accuracy to available information. > COVID-19 Vaccination: o The COVID-19 vaccines were 'sold' to the public as the way out of the pandemic, but they were never (or tested) to impact on infection or transmission (as the public were told) - to which health authorities now admit. Scientifically, a 'blood-based' systemic injection was never going to be able to stop a respiratory virus that enters via the respiratory mucosa. Vaccination via intramuscular injection cannot induce IgA mucosal antibodies, whereas wild-type infection can, meaning vaccination was never going to prevent infection and / or therefore transmission, but infection and natural immunity can. This simple biological principle was ignored, and instead division was created amongst the community between the have been vaccinated and have not, enhanced by fear and threat that was over-represented. Further, the vaccines were only ever tested for an impact on symptom severity (the outcomes of which are debatable) yet this is not consistent with the information that was told to the public (again an issue with transparency). Discriminatory measures were used against the unvaccinated to essentially force or coerce them into being vaccinated, and the public were told this was justified, when in reality vaccination was never able to stop infection or transmission and could only (possibly) reduce your own symptom severity which is a personal choice and has no impact on others around you. Once this became evident (because transmission was happening between vaccinated people), there was no further updates to the public or apologies for the mis-information that actually came from the government on this - again highlighting the lack of transparency. o Research about the lack of effectiveness and safety issues of the vaccines, or potential of natural immunity was ignored, including studies that showed (many more studies are available): - vaccinated people recover more slowly and remained infectious/contagious and able to transmit for longer than unvaccinated - cases and symptoms were higher among vaccinated individuals than those with natural immunity and natural immunity limits reinfection and further severity - the risk of serious adverse events from vaccination surpassed any risk reduction with the numbers needed to treat/vaccinate being excessively high in order to prevent any hospitalisation or death and a greater incidence of issues in the vaccinated - a range of adverse effects including autoimmune, cardiovascular, neurological, oncological and effects associated with the vaccine spike protein - negative efficacy toward hospitalisation whereby vaccinated people are now mor likely to be hospitalised relative to newer variants (page 25) - higher rates of (re)infection in vaccinated individuals (a) (b) noting reinfections are associated with additional risk of death, hospitalisation and post-covid sequelae that is NOT reduced by vaccination - IgG class switch leading to immune tolerance - DNA fragments have been found in COVID-19 vaccine vials - Ribosomal frameshifting has been found to occur in 1 in 4 people meaning any random protein may be manufactured in the body - The potential for a significant number of fatalities associated with the COVID-19 ni with evidence this was known early in interim reporting o The Safety Tables in the TGA AusPAR documents (a), (b), (c) state that the long-term safety of these vaccines remains unknown and that Vaccine Associated Enhanced Disease is a risk meaning the COVID-19 vaccines should never have been allowed to be mandated. o Subst have used FOI's to analyse state government health data which indicates significant safety concerns relating to cardiac and neurological illness that can only be attributed to the vaccines (as described in the Substacks), and whereby the state health services, despite being alerted to their own data, have failed to review this information. o ATAGI themselves include the potential for long-term cardiac consequences with studies finding impaired cardiac function 1 year later, a 1 in 35 incidence of myocarditis following vaccination, a significant association with cardiac related death, and evidence that all age groups and all people that are vaccinated suffer some extend of cardiac injury. o I ths that may relate to COVID-19 vaccination are being ignored. o Natural immunity was, and continues to be, ignored despite its superior protection where vaccine mandates remain in workplaces despite most to all Australians having been infected or exposed o An excessive amount has been spent on a large number of vaccine doses, including something like 7 doses per person - this was established early such that there was never an intention that people would only need 2 doses, but that is again not what the public were told - again highlighting the lack of transparency on these contracts. There was no support for a local protein-based vaccine created by Vaxine and used internationally to give Australians a choice to take this vaccine. Solution: No vaccine should be mandated in the circumstances as above. All information should be welcomed and considered instead of censored and ignored. Personal Protective Equipment: o Despite repeated evidence, including in the governments own previous pandemic preparedness information, that masks are not effective for preventing COVID-19 they continued to be mandated. If COVID-19 is aerosol generated (not droplet), there is no likelihood that a cloth mask or surgical mask could have any impact whereby standard infection control measures for droplet precautions are surgical masks, but beyond that a N95 is required. The use of these long-term pose other issues relating to the persons health but also cost and environmentally. RAT Testing: When RAT testing had to be completed by ALL vaccinated SA Health staff and patients were being tested, unvaccinated staff were not allowed to work despite the use of this effective control measure further highlighting the discrimination against unvaccinated persons. Other potential treatments were ignored or worse they were attacked and censored including Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine despite copious studies presented to the contrary. Solution: Best practice scientific method needs to be applied to all information, not cherry picking or mis-representation of information to suit a desired outcome ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0244 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0245 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0245.pdf As an elector and Australian born citizen, I demand that a royal commission be held to address the following issues. * corrupt vaccine procurement * secret contracts with vaccine companies * mask mandates * lockdowns * vaccine mandates * official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission * vaccine injuries * media censorship * silencing of doctors * the roll of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors * the poor treatment of victims To build a relationship of trust with the Australian public these matters need to be addressed with a Royal Commission as soon as possible. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0245 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0246 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0246.pdf I am writing this email today because I have had enough!!!!!!!! I am sick to death of my loved ones DYING because people like yourselves are STILL injecting this poison into innocent people's arms. There is enough data out there to prove that these shots are DEADLY. If you are choosing to ignore this data and you refuse to investigate the results, and you won't listen to the brave Dr's, Nurses, & Scientists that have spoken out, then you are complicit in perpetrating the biggest Crime Against Humanity in history, and MAY GOD HAVE MERCY ON YOUR SOULS. Your silence to ensure that you do not get deregistered by APHRA is disgusting. And shrugging your shoulders and saying, "I'm just doing my job, won't cut it!!!! I know that you are making a fortune from this WAR, and that sickens me to my core. I cannot wait for the lawsuits to begin, because the Government have thrown all Dr's, Nurses & Chemists who are participating in this^^^^^J under the bus. Your day will come, & you will be held accountable for the role you have played. In the early stages of the rollout, there is no way on this earth that you were obtaining proper "INFORMED CONSENT" You COULD NOT have been giving your clients the information necessary for them to make an informed decision, because there wasn't any information. All you did was parrot the narrative " It's safe and effective" I will bring you up to speed with my personal death and injury list to date. Found in his bed, the lights on, but no-one home - taken to a -Found Dead in her home , herH - Dead in his bed - - Found dead in her bed - Went out for lunch and just went down like a sack of potatoes - Turned off her machine the next day.| -Currently in hospital in an induced So the Dr's think) meanwhile in the last 4 months she has had and a followed by| followed by again, and again Needed to save him. Manased to save him Years old behind the wheel of his car coming back from Crashed headfirst into a parked car. I could go on! my list is that long. Why don't you go and visit a Forrest of the Fallen. They are springing up everywhere. We know Main Stream Media won't talk about the deaths and injuries, because they too have been silenced. Be on the right side of history and put down your weapons. In this case Needles. YOU ARE KILLING PEOPLE, AND YOU ARE COMPLICIT. EVIL THRIVES WHEN GOOD PEOPLE DO NOTHING. I really hope that you will dig deep into your souls and just stop it!! You are murdering people, and someone has to call you out on it. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0246 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0247 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0247.pdf RE: Call for Covid Inquiry and Royal Commission Dear Prime Minister Albanese, As an Australian, I demand the following inquiries and a Royal Commission into the treacherous Covid behaviours conducted by the Australian government and bodies. 1. I DEMAND a royal commission for a FULL investigation! 2. EXPOSE corrupt vaccine acquisitions and SECRET contracts with Vaccine manufacturers! 3. Illegal vaccine mandates! 4. Official misinformation about vaccines blocking transmission! 5. Vaccine injuries! 6. Silencing of doctors and experts! 7. AHPRA and ATAGI's censorship of doctors! 8. ATG banning of life saving medicines like Ivermectin and HCQ. Regards, ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0247 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0248 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0248.pdf Submission The public health response to the pandemic many measures were instituted in the name of medicine. There were unprecedented lockdowns, closing of businesses, separation of family & friends, discrimination, economic reprisal for personal health decisions, not to mention unprecedented police response to peaceful protests to name a few. All in the name of health & medicine. Medical & nursing professionals were actively silenced & told to follow the official narrative, directly conflicting with their own professional codes of conduct. There was unprecedented censorship of scientific debate, indeed we could not even openly discuss alternative treatments to vaccinations without threats from our own certification boards, regulatory boards & unions. Throughout my forty plus years of nursing I have been taught to question - however, any questions regarding covid or vaccinations we were labelled conspiracy theorists & we were shut down. All health professionals should be able to act in the best interests of their patients. Free from government overreach & destruction of the patient confidentiality bond. I want to see the inquiry: • Establish & provide evidence the lockdowns worked. • Establish & provide evidence the vaccines were safe. • Establish & provide evidence the vaccines were effective. • Establish & provide evidence medical censorship has been beneficial to public health. • Provide evidence that AHPRA's suspension of health professionals has been beneficial to public health. However, more than anything I want the inquiry to demand a Royal Commission for a full investigation into the whole pandemic debacle. Regards RN ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0248 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0249 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0249.pdf My name is Helen McWha. I am a Nurse/Midwife now prematurely in retirement due to mandates for health workers within Victoria. I served the community in public hospitals forcover 30 years. All jobs related to my experience are unavailable to me as a result of mandates still being in place, right down to disability, aged care and childcare. I took one dose of Pfizer in October 2021 and had a significant reaction within days, which involved a bleed into the iris of my eye and chest pain which lasted for weeks. took AstraZeneca and he too became with required him to go to hospital twice and sadly lasted for months. He was too unwell to work and ended up being^^^^^^due to mandates. Both of us attended hospital, but had to push to get a doctor to report our reactions, despite seeing our General Practitioners, Emergency Consultants and an did admit the was suspicious and was likely due to the Covid vaccination. My gave him a short term exemption and was then rung by Victorian health authorities and told he could not give him another exemption despite my ^^^^|still being unwell and requiring numerous investigations. His^^^^^^Hrefused to give him an exemption at all, stating he was unable to. A '^^^Hdoctor who assessed written reports of anyone with a reaction or vaccine injury, rang m\^^^^|and told him he had assessed his vaccine injury report and he was deemed fit to have another Covid vaccine and suggested Novavax, despite my^^^^|still having^^^^^|and having never actually seen That's the level of irresponsibility demonstrated by governing authorities during the pandemic. To recommend another Covid vaccine when a person is still unwell from the first. Our story is just one of thousands, as is evident by reports to the TGA. People who have been effected by the Covid vaccine with regards to their health have been gas lit and penalised simply because we were injured and unwell. The mandates were absolutely cruel to those who were injured by the vaccine and many people who were already sick and struggling were then financially deprived of their income and in some cases, their career. The governance by the state government in Victoria was incredibly harsh and had zero compassion for those who were unwell following vaccination. The fact that doctors were silenced by Aphra and threatened with deregistration if they said anything against the government narrative was extremely dangerous because Doctors and Nurses who were seeing firsthand the reactions and injuries presenting to clinics and emergency departments were too scared to report and admit that the vaccine could be the reason for the reaction and injuries they were seeing. This lack of free speech and willingness to report what they were witnessing was incredibly dangerous. To continue to advise people who had a reaction or injury to their first dose of Covid vaccine to have further doses of the vaccine was negligent, and sadly reflected the level of medical irresponsibility that was demonstrated during the pandemic. The 'safe and effective' narrative was not true for all, and those people should have been supported and cared for, especially with regard to their health and finances. Certainly they should not have had to have another vaccine if they had a reaction or injury from the first, just to keep working and survive financially. Early treatment in the form of antivirals should have been available for all Australians from the beginning and healthcare advice to educate people on how to build immunity through nutrition and other means was sadly ignored. The focus on vaccination being the only source of protection was inaccurate and coercive. There was no informed consent, no education around what a 'provisionally approved' vaccine was, and the fact that there was no long-term data available was never discussed. Healthy children were not at risk of severe illness from Covid infection and yet a provisionally approved vaccine was recommended to be given to them. That can only be described as unethical, especially knowing there is no long-term data available. The same applied to pregnant women. One would have to question why you would recommend this vaccine to these groups, especially when we know the efficacy of the vaccine is short term, antivirals can be used and we have no data on the effects on the unborn child. The fact that people lost their livelihood if they were not vaccinated can only be described as blackmail. This completely destroyed any form of valid consent according to the Australian Handbook on Immunisation, as consent was not obtained without coercion. As a Nurse/Midwife of over 30 years, I am extremely concerned at the governance during the pandemic. The degree of 'force' that was used was inhumane and caused so much harm. The silencing of doctors can only be described as dangerous and has eroded the doctor/patient relationship with many people now questioning the motives of their medical providers. No healthcare professional should be gagged when they are administering a provisionally approved vaccine and seeing the reactions and injuries occuring firsthand. That silencing is abhorrent and it must be stopped. I am no longer registered with Aphra because of this reason. I will not associate with this organisation because of what they have done. This organisation needs to be investigated and disbanded and a new regulatory body formed with medical professionals overseeing their peers. Likewise, the Therapeutic Goods Administration also needs to be investigated and it's source of funding needs to be thoroughly scrutinised. It cannot have any conflict of interest if it is to operate transparently and protect Australians when assessing new medicines and vaccinations. If a pandemic should ever happen again, the focus on vaccination being the only source of protection needs to stop. Any vaccine coming into this country needs to be thoroughly tested and assessed independently prior to its rollout. Early treatment measures must be employed including the provision of antivirals to all Australians to stop the progression of disease. Education around building immunity through nutrition, spending time outdoors, exercise and other health measures must be emphasised and provided. I hope you will listen to all submissions and put the welfare of ALL Australians first. Those responsible for decision making previously do need to be scrutinised and held accountable. Grave errors have occurred, many Australians are still suffering. Complete transparency and honestly and a strong desire to make significant change is required if this enquiry will have any benefit at all. Yours sincerely, Helen McWha ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0249 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0250 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0250.pdf I was excited to see Australia announce the creation of a Centre for Disease Control. COVID-19 made it clear that Australia needs an institution of this kind. I’m also glad that Australia has commissioned this Inquiry, including to inform the priorities of the CDC. There’s a long-standing public health adage that “prevention is better than a cure”. The same logic applies to pandemics.in “The Origin and Prevention of Pandemics” show that the “wait-and-respond approach is not sufficient and that the development of systems to prevent pandemics before they are established should be considered imperative to human health.” I think this insight should be foundational to the direction of this Inquiry. My submission focuses on a select issues, but my overall view is that pandemic prevention should be a key priority of the CDC and that our institutions and leaders should never concede that pandemics are inevitable. The Inquiry’s terms of reference include preventative health measures. The best preventative health measure is likely to be preventing pandemics from occurring. To do this most effectively, we need to have a good understanding of how pandemics might begin. Historically, zoonoses have been the leading cause of pandemics. This is a significant risk that government policy should address. Looking forward,in “Securing Civilisation Against Catastrophic Pandemics” use a range of tools to estimate the likelihood of different future pandemic scenarios. Their estimates show that dangerous pathogens leaking from labs have likely surpassed zoonoses as the key risk. Even more worryingly, they argue that maliciously engineered pandemics could become the overriding risk unless action is taken. The reason engineered pandemics have become a critical public health concern is rapid progress in biotechnology and the rise of “dual-use” Al products. “Dual-use risks” refers to the risks generated by Ais intended to perform useful tasks if used by malicious actors. Specifically, biotechnology applications using artificial intelligence have capabilities that could amplify the ability of terrorists to harm Australians. The US is taking dual-use risks seriously. On 25 July 2023, the US Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law took evidence about the potential risks of Al from Committee Chair, Senator Blumenthal began the hearing by highlighting these “dual-use” risks: The future is not science fiction or fantasy — it’s not even the future, it’s here and now. And a number of put the timeline at 2 years before we see some of the most severe biological dangers. It may be shorter because the pace of development is not only stunningly fast, it is also accelerating at a stunning pace. The hearings painted a concerning picture where frontier models will soon have the ability to combine with advances in biotechnology to supercharge the ability of malicious actors to do harm. Anthropic, agreed with these concerns and called on Government to take action: Anthropic is concerned that Al could empower a much larger set of actors to misuse biology... Today, certain steps in bioweapons production involve knowledge that can’t be found on Google or in textbooks... We found that today’s Al tools can fill in some of these steps... a straightforward extrapolation of today’s systems to those we expect to see in 2 to 3 years suggests a substantial risk that Al systems will be able to fill in all the missing pieces, enabling many more actors to carry out large-scale biological attacks... We have instituted mitigations against these risks in our own deployed models, briefed a number of US government officials—all of whom found the results disquieting, and are piloting a responsible disclosure process with other Al companies to share information on this and similar risks. However, private action is not enough—this risk and many others like it requires a systemic policy response. In response to these hearings, on 30 October 2023, President Biden made an executive order that does two main things. First, it put a timeline on US agencies to develop a framework to ensure the proper screening of synthetic DNA. With or without the additional risks of Al, synthetic DNA is likely the essential input that any malicious or negligent actor would need to engineer a pandemic. Second, it put a range of requirements on Al labs designed to ensure future Al models don’t have these “dual-use risks” that could contribute to a future pandemic. While I appreciate that this issue may feel outside the scope of a preventative public health measure - the same was said of clean drinking water, the work of Florence Nightingale or many other advances in public health that came from leaders realising that a vast range of social and technological factors feed into public health. Indeed, the history of innovation in public health is a history of tackling cutting-edge problems that others neglected. Al and synthetic biology are today’s versions of those historic problems. Citations Recent Senate Hearing Discussing Al X-Risk I Medium Al suggested 40,000 new possible chemical weapons in just six hours - The Verge Dual use of artificial-intelligence-powered drug discovery | Nature Machine Intelligence The diagnostic and wastewater infrastructure and talent built up over COVID-19 response should not be wound down but proactively pivoted for public health. Clinical metagenomics, wastewater testing and the testing of airports, cruises and other ports of entry could provide welcome data to improve the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS) and provide a volume of samples to test routinely with metagenomic sequencing for novel pathogens. Keeping this diagnostic infrastructure ‘warm’ would also mean that in the next pandemic, diagnostic capability could expand more easily, which we know first-hand is essential to halting community transmission of a pathogen.in a testimony to the U.S. House Hearing on “Biosecurity for the Future: Strengthening Deterrence and Detection” said: “Sustainably financed systems for early detection and robust response can stop outbreaks at the source before they evolve into global pandemics’’ Any early detection system must be robustly financed into perpetuity and resistant to funding cuts, and one way to do this is to have a public health monitoring system that is consciously set up to be useful both in “peace-time” and health emergencies. I think the inquiry should familiarise itself with the diagnostics of different sampling types like: • Clinical diagnostics • Wastewater monitoring and, • Airports, cruises and other ports of entry. It should also familiarise itself with technology developments around: • Metagenomics (both clinical and wastewater) • CRISPR-based diagnostics • Improvements to and multiplexing of PCR and LAMP It should also familiarise itself with the many emerging cost-effectiveness and effectiveness models, as well as obstacles on such systems in literature to inform the design of an early detection system. For example: • Sharma et al (2023) Threat Net: A Metagenomic Surveillance, Health Security estimates that for $400-800 mil dollars it would have a 95% change of detecting a novel SARS-CoV-2 like respiratory pathogen after 10 emergency department presentations and 79 infections across the US • The pre-print by Liu et al (2023) Quantitatively assessing early detection strategies for mitigating COVID-19 and future pandemics estimates that hospital monitoring could have detected COVID-19 -1000 cases earlier. Wastewater surveillance could provide an early warning for pandemics with long incubation periods. Different pathogens would suit different early detection sampling and platforms. • Wegryzyn et al (2022) Early Detection of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome GoronavirusS Variants Using Traveler-based Genomic Surveillance at 4 US Airports. September 2021-January 2022, Clinical Infectious Diseases provided early-warning variant detection, reporting the first US Omicron BA.2 and BA.3 in North America. • Liang et al (2023) Managing the Transition to Widespread Metagenomic Monitoring: Policy Considerations for Future Biosurveillance, Health Security outlines a number of policy obstacles that need to be overcome for a public health monitoring system with seguencing as it’s backbone to be successful over the next decades • Research by SecureBio and MIT’s Sculpting Evolution group https://naobservatorv.org/ on monitoring for exponentially increasing nucleic acid seguences since viral nucleic acids that have pandemic potential also increase exponentially • Ghouneimy et al (2 23) CRISPR-Based Diagnostics: Challenges and Potential Solutions toward Point-of-Care Applications, ACS Synth Biol explores costs associated with CRISPR based diagnostic and what this might look like in resource-poor settings. How well we handle the next pandemic will largely be a function of how guickly we can detect and understand it. Every element of the terms of reference hangs off this. On that basis, early pathogen-agnostic detection systems need to be invested in now to get ahead of the next pandemic. With how necessary PCR diagnostics were in controlling case numbers before vaccine uptake was high, in my opinion, it would border on negligence if we don’t improve our diagnostics ability before the next pandemic pathogen outbreak. I recommend the Inguiry direct the new CDC to explore the benefits of a pathogen-agnostic early detection system for both the near-term public health benefits and the long-term early detection pandemic warning system. I think pandemics are one of the most important issues of our time, and expert assessments that the risk of pandemics is increasing are alarming. I think this inguiry should carefully consider how future pandemics could start and ensure it makes specific recommendations to reduce their likelihood. This should include the known mechanisms that have been with humans since time immemorial, such as zoonoses, as well as more recent risks, such as lab leaks, and emerging threats, such as engineered pathogens. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0250 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0251 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0251.pdf To whom it may concern I have watched from the very beginning how the covid narrative played out. As I'm now anaphylactic thanks to the flu vaccine back in 2014, I was told by the emergency department dr not to get any more vaccines as my chances of more severe anaphylaxis increase significantly. My dr of 30 yrs argued I didn't have a reaction so I went to freedom of information^^^^Hfor my medical records for that day. She then said I had to have one but she didn't know which one. I told her I've been reading everything coming out of the USA and uk. I said I won't be taking any of that poison. I asked for an exemption and she said she couldn't give one and also each year I got an exemption for the flu shot no problem until COVID hit. The government forgets what people are taught in healthcare and we knew what was happening was absolutely ridiculous rubbish. I had my workplace zoom me 3 times asking " give me a reason to not sack you", I said it's an experimental jab and I won't participate, mandates aren't law and I refuse to go along with it so I will resign. I watched my kids get jabbed and my twin boys both hadThey hate going to the doctor now because the government told them to say it's just anxiety any problem they had- one also has My daughter^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Band has days where she She was never like that before. I watched my clients have fear in their eyes as they couldn't see family, us carers put a stop to that and explained what was happening so they started refusing to follow the plan. Australia already has a pandemic plan this was put aside for the outside entities to get into our country, the WEF and WHO. No one will conform next time the government tries this rubbish. Same with the climate crisis, come on this is about making people rich and poor poorer. Get rid of these outside entities and let the people govern our country. We don't have a shortage of anything. Stop the depopulation and food shortages Drop the renewables right now, we the people aren't falling for it as we can crunch the numbers too, it just won't work. Small pockets of places sure but not the whole country. Kind regards KarenAnderson Mum, daughter, aunt, niece, mental health support worker. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0251 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0252 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0252.pdf Submission and evidence to the covid-19 response inquiry. December 2023 A Royal Commission must occur to investigate the crimes against humanity following the unlawful and negligent behaviour of government authorities, politicians, medical professionals, medical companies, media outlets, celebrities, and other public influencers during the covid-19 response. The following items must be addressed: • Illegal mandates locking people in their own homes, forcing people to wear ineffective and absurd items on their face, forcing people to take unnecessary and harmful vaccines, forcing people to be separated by 6 feet or more, force closure of small businesses, limiting people's free right to congregate, limiting people's free right to exercise, restricting people right to travel freely, and many other violations of basic human rights. • Censorship of free speech on media (including social media) which discusses, or even mentions, the word 'vaccine'. Removal of entire posts, videos, podcasts is ongoing to this day. Public discussion of the safety or efficacy of vaccines is prohibited. • The targeting, intimidation, and arrest of individuals by police and government authorities, including pregnant women, who opposed mandates or any other forms of government control and coercion. • Scaremongering and exaggeration by media, news channels, government advertising, politicians, celebrities, and other public influencers as to the possible dangers of covid-19. • Transporting patients who showed signs of illness out of hospitals and locking them in nursing homes with vulnerable, but otherwise healthy, elderly people. This single government measure, whether carried out with deliberate intention to cause mass suffering, through negligence, or otherwise, undoubtedly spread the covid-19 disease, or some other flu like virus, much further causing countless unnecessary deaths and trauma to the most vulnerable of society. Opposing these measures resulted in targeting, intimidation, and illegal arrests by government authorities. • Dereliction of duty by nursing and medical staff who decided to perform and publish 'tik tok' dance videos in the midst of a pandemic, or other flu like disease. • Isolating vulnerable people away from their family and friends for years on end in draconian institutions whilst nursing staff instilled a climate of fear, wearing unnecessary and intimidating Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), and following illegal mandates on threat of being forced out of employment, targeted, or arrested. • Implementing and forcing the use of harmful 'end of life' drugs such as midazolam, and harmful procedures such as forced breathing machines, on vulnerable patients if they tested positive to covid-19, exasperating the effects of covid-19 or any other flu like disease. • Suppression of inexpensive, tested, proven, and long-standing remedies, for covid-19 and other flu like diseases, with few, if any side effects or adverse reactions. This includes hydroxychloroquine and vitamin D. • Failure of government authorities, politicians, or medical professionals to promote healthy practices such as exercising, eating well, getting sunlight exposure, breathing fresh air, socialising, and having a positive mindset. In fact, all such aforementioned entities actively promoted the exact opposite to a healthy lifestyle and went out of their way to instil fear and dread in people in a sinister planned and coordinated way whether it be through deliberate intent to cause harm and mass suffering, negligence, ineptitude, or for other unclear reasons. • Government authorities and politicians listening to and acting on advice from corrupt, unelected, international corporations including the World Health Organisation, Unofficial United Nations, International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organisation, Food and Drug Administration, and other such entities. • Corrupt procurement of vaccines, personal protective equipment, medical equipment, and other items by government authorities, politicians, and corporations. • Misrepresentation of vaccines as being 'safe and effective' when they were documented as carrying severe adverse reactions (including death) by the Therapeutical Goods Administration (TGA), failed to stop transmission of covid-19, and failed to stop people from acquiring covid- 19, or any other pathogens. • Silencing, oppression, and shutting down of doctors by APHRA and ATAGI. • Failure by APHRA and ATAGI to respond to complaints, concerns, or feedback from the general public or listen to, or act, on advice or research from ethical medical professionals who stood up and spoke truth by questioning the validity of the covid-19 'pandemic' response and the harmful vaccines. • Censorship and targeting of ethical medical doctors and medical professionals who stood up and spoke truth about the inappropriate covid-19 government response and harmful vaccines. • Failure to investigate, prosecute, or otherwise discipline doctors and other medical professionals who refused to issue vaccine exemptions to people who had suffered vaccine injuries. • Failure of doctors, nursing staff, or other medical professionals to provide safety data or ask for informed consent from patients prior to inoculating them with harmful vaccines. • Failure of doctors, nursing staff, and other medical professionals to acknowledge, or show any remorse, that people may have been injured by covid-19 vaccines. • Failing of media, government authorities, and politicians to acknowledge the harms or show any remorse caused by covid-19 vaccines, apologise for their actions, or admit they may have acted in error. • Mandating that for people who wish to remain employed and earn a living wage to first be poisoned by an experimental vaccine and then registering their own private medical information, including vaccination status, with corrupt government institutions such as Medicare and Centrelink. These institutions have repeatedly breached their own privacy policies by the leaking, either accidental or otherwise, of private and confidential patient information. • Police brutality against unarmed, peaceful demonstrators who opposed illegal mandates and loss of basic human rights including freedom of speech. • Illegal police roadblocks placed on interstate borders restricting free movement of travel and issuing illegal fines to people who attempted to cross borders without a valid 'covid pass'. • Denial of entry to businesses and services without presenting a 'covid pass'. • Mandatory covid testing, requiring the insertion of medical equipment into bodily orifices and the sampling, and storing of genetic information including DNA, for the issuance of a 'covid pass'. • Establishment of 'quarantine zones' and tracking the movements of people and 'covid positive status' through their 'covid pass'. • Complete lack of acknowledgement or public discussion of the sudden increase in mortality rates across Australia and the rest of the world after the implementation of forced, harmful vaccines on the population. • Complete lack of acknowledgement or public discussion of the completely normal, steady mortality rate during the covid-19, or other flu like disease, "pandemic' of late 2019 and 2020. Unofficial These crimes against humanity, committed and perpetuated, by government authorities, politicians, medical professionals, medical companies, media outlets, celebrities and other public influencers must be exposed and those found guilty of promoting the inoculation of people with known harmful substances, or inoculating people with known harmful substances, and denial of basic human rights including freedom of speech, must be prosecuted and sentenced accordingly. Justice must be served to everyone harmed by this covid-19 response. Unofficial ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0252 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0253 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0253.pdf Submissions and evidence to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry: Dear Sir/Madam, This is my personal submission regarding the Covid 19 response. The overall impact that the Government’s response had on both myself and my wife and our extended family was disgraceful. As a fulltime carer of my wife who suffers with^^^^J ^^^^■the impact it had on our mental health was horrific. Due to my wife’s condition, we decided early on that she would NOT be receiving any of the experimental Covid shots. This was due to the fact that her er Neurologist said ‘Any vaccine can cause inflammation and he advised against anymore vaccines, especially the influenza shots. Therefore the decision was made by both of us not to participate in our government’s experiment. Living in a large over 55’s retirement resort on he impact of the decisions that were made by the Government and it’s relevant Health departments impacted us considerably. The lockdowns affected the 600+ residents in our village so much so that their physical as well as mental health deteriorated greatly. Then when things started to return to normal, the two of us were impacted again. Not having been jabbed we were not allowed to even enter our Community Hall or participate in any activities within our village or even enter any cafes or restaurants etc. Our mental health suffered so much so that I personally suffered from anxiety and depression that lasted months. Many of our friends and family suffered greatly due to the lockdowns. Our daughter was not able to visit us for months and that had a considerable impact on my wife and her medical condition. Then to top it off nded up with two ambulance trips to the due to heart issues after the Pfyzer Covid shots. she had intense pains in her chest and was rushed to hospital. On both occasions she was fobbed off by the overstretched Doctors and sent back home on the same day of the event. Only after a couple of months when she could finally get into see a heart specialist (at her own expense) was she given a prognosis of Myocarditis. The specialist said it would have been bought on by the Pfyzer shots. The additional stress for both my wife and I The way the rollout of the dreaded Covid ‘Vaccines’ was done was disgraceful. The amount of pressure everyone was put under to get the jabs was terrible. The amount of lies that all of Australia was told by both the government and the mainstream media was wrong. Nothing the relevant Health authorities were saying could be believed. Then when most professions and many industries were mandated to be injected with the experimental ‘vaccines’ we were simply shocked and could not believe this was happening in our democratic nation Australia. On one hand we had the Prime Minister telling every Australia that ‘No Australian will be forced to take the Covid vaccines’ then on the other hand the State Governments were implementing ‘Vaccine mandates’ and forcing everyone to get them or be sacked. I believe that hundreds of thousands of hard-working Australians were forced to leave their lifelong careers due to the mandates. In many cases leading to acute shortages in Nursing Staff, Doctors, Specialists, Police officers, Firemen, Ambulance Paramedics, etc. Most of these professionals decided not to participate in our government’s rushed introduction of the experimental Covid ‘vaccines’. The evidence was not there that these so called ‘vaccines’ were actually ‘safe and effective’. Even now many professionals who decided not to be ‘vaccinated’ are still not permitted in certain industries to return to their respective professions. Most public hospitals are still acutely understaffed as Ambulance Paramedics, Doctors and Nursing Staff have still not been able to return to work. This can be seen by the amount of ambulance ramping at most of Queensland’s hospitals. And no doubt every public hospital Australia wide. I believe that it come out earlier this year by the WHO that: ‘The Covid 19 vaccines don’t stop the transmission or stop the person that has had the shots from getting the virus’ This is quite evident when you see the amount of people that have been ‘vaccinated’ and were still contracting the virus. In many cases severely. From our own personal experience neither of us (unvaccinated) caught the Covid virus throughout the entire ‘so called Pandemic’ but many of our friends and family did in fact become very ill with the covid virus even after subjecting themselves to the so called ‘vaccines’ and subsequent booster shots. I also read recently that the Federal Government is still purchasing more covid ‘Booster shots’ as late as October this year. The Federal government is still wasting Tax Payers money on medications that don’t even work. The Astralian government is increasing the massive profits that the likes of Pfyzer and Moderna have already made. I have also read that our Federal Government is helping to finance massive manufacturing plants in co-operation with • Well over 150,000 Australians have suffered from countless often severe allergic reactions. Conditions that include long term health conditions of the heart like Myocarditis, Pericarditis, Myocardial Infarction, Auto-Immune conditions such as Multiple Sclerosis, Lupus, Guillian-Barre syndrome, Ulcerative Colitis, Crohn’s Disease, Rheumatoid Arthritis, just to name a few. In addition to this, these experimental Covid ‘vaccines’ have caused hundreds of deaths. Although only 14 deaths are reported on the TGA website up to 14th December 2023 there was 952 reported deaths associated with the shots. Our government in its wisdom decided (just like every other nation) to give the Big Pharma indemnity against liability for any or all side effects or deaths from the Covid ‘vaccines’ That placed the burden on our own government to pay every person in Australia any compensation they deserve from Injury or death. I believe that at one stage a couple of years ago the government made an announcement that any person that presented to a public hospital in Australia and was admitted overnight were able to put a claim in for $1000.00. Perhaps that was why 99% of people who presented to a public hospital were ushered out the same day even though many were still showing symptoms of vaccine damage. Therefore, any Australian that has been vaccine injured or died from the implementation of the Covid jabs has to pursue compensation through the legal system. This situation is certainly not ideal as the person has to engage with the legal system, which is both costly and complex, and there’s no guarantee of success. Compensation may not even be possible via our legal system. That’s because in most cases, it will be difficult to show in court a serious side-effect was due to a fault in the ‘vaccine’ composition or negligence in the way it was administered. Therefore in Australia, people with a vaccine injury, either Covid-19 or any other vaccine, will likely bear the costs of their injury by themselves, and seek treatment by our publicly funded or private health systems. Even our NDIS scheme dose NOT cover temporary vaccine-related injuries. That leaves literally hundreds of thousands of vaccine injured people in Australia virtually out on a limb. Not being able to return to work, with little to no income and struggling to make ends meet for their families. The pittance that the government announced a couple of years ago for any person that presented to a public hospital (a mere $1000.00) is like a slap in the face to everyday Australians. The last time I looked it can cost literally $millions just to support one person in Australia that ends up with permanent vaccine damage. It is disgraceful and disresptful how a democratically run nation can be treated by its own government. The confidence of the Australian population in our governments both State and Federal and their respective politicians is at an all-time low and may never ever be restored due to the damage caused by our government officials, bureaucrats, health ministers and health authorities throughout Covid. We both personally believe that a Royal Commission into the Covid-19 response and the way it was handled and is still being handled is the only way forward. With the huge number of families that have been vaccine damaged skyrocketing throughout the nation a Royal Commission must be held to avoid this ever happening again to everyone of us living in this wonderful country. Sincerely, Gary Olive ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0253 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0255 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0255.pdf Re Submission to the Covid19 enquiry To whom it may concern, I am an entrepreneur who lived in up to October 2020. My Covid 19 story The symptoms and sudden severity of her illness lead me to check online at the end of 2019 for any outbreak around the world, and that is where I came across the Wuhan story of 3 deaths from Coronavirus were reported in Wuhan. health system did (or could) not check for Coronavirus at end 2019 or early 2020, so I have not been able that my mother did in fact have Coronavirus at end 2019. But, because I had been early aware if the Wuhan outbreak I was some days and weeks ahead of the general population who did not wake up to C19 until mid to late Jan 2020. Personally I have always remained to be convinced that any of the measures that the authorities and governments tool were necessary or effective. Specifically 1. Masks were something that I was forced to wear during the pandemic in certain businesses. I remain to be convinced if effective and or necessary. 2. Lock downs costed and had a major mental health impact. 3. The vaccine which was emergency released has never seemed to be proven to be necessary or effective - yet a lot of money was spent on it. People who did not take the vaccine were accused of killing their family and communities. This was of course never proven to be true and those who did not take the vaccine fared better than those who did in terms of illness and death. 4. The total waste of money from poor decisions and ill thought out of reactions has left a lasting impact on the economy and people’s lived. In 2023 the world is suffering from significant inflation prices, and a significant wealth transfer from the poor/Middle class to the rich-asset owners. The upside of C19 for me was in the following ways 1. My businesses benefited from government handling outs. 2. My businesses were all remote operating before c19 so we had little impact from C19 3. I personally got to move out of Sydney when property was cheap and this seachange had allowed me a great freedom and opportunity to thrice during c19. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0255 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0256 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0256.pdf As outlined as an election promise by now Prime Minister, Anothony Albanese, there needs to be a Royal Commission into the Australian Governments Covid response and it needs to address the following: 1. Corrupt Vaccine Procurement 2. Secret Contracts with Vaccine Manufacturers 3. Mask Mandates 4. Lockdowns 5. Vaccine Mandates 6. Official Misinformation by media in vaccines ability to block transmission 7. Vaccine Injuries 8. Media Censorship 9. Silencing Doctors 10. The role of AHPRA & ATAGI in censorship & oppression of Doctors and the treatment of victims. 11. The authority AHPRA has been granted to censor and punish Doctors regardless of patients' best outcome. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0256 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0257 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0257.pdf Government works for the people of Australia. AHPRA and the Government need consultation with the people who have direct contact with their patients and customers, rather than a blanket rule that sounds like it came from the dystopian 1984 novel. AMPS supports: • The primacy of the doctor/patient relationship, with Government bureaucrats being removed from the surgery room. • Making it easier for doctors to speak out publicly. Doctors are currently gagged by AHPRA. • The removal of AHPRA from monitoring doctors on social media and voicing their medical opinions. • Resisting Government Coercion. • The ability to speak out about refugee health without fear of de-registration. • Resisting Government mandates. • Resisting Government agencies running roughshod over doctors in what they can prescribe and recommend. AMPS remains fully committed to defending your right to treat patients as you see fit and respects the enormous amount of medical training undergone to achieve this right. AHPRA and Government must be drastically limited in this space. https://amps.redunion.com.au/about The government formed a plan of masks, lockdowns and vaccinations without due process. Many experts had solutions that didn't require the draconian response of the government, these professionals were cut out of the plan and pilloried for their views. That is why this bill for mis- and disinformation is dangerous. Government did not consult with a wide variety of sources including the public, and dismissed those with other responses in matters that effected the whole population. The government gave their sector pay rises, while others suffered from their covid response. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0257 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0259 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0259.pdf Submission to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry I am an Australian born mother, researcher, part-time administrator and farmer. I am making this submission due to the unprecedented disruption and harm that the Government's response to Covid-19 has wrought on an Australia that I barely recognise as the place of freedom and a fair go. If anyone had told me pre-2019 that my husband could be sacked for being healthy; I would have to bribe my way into a shop to buy school shoes for my children; or that those children could be summarily discriminated against because their parents declined their participation in a medical experiment, I would not have believed them. That the same medical experiment was the subject of misinformation broadcast by the Trusted News Initiative, via the Government and paid for by our taxes, is still a source of disbelief. 1. Who was responsible for the complete non-adherence, indeed the opposite response, advised in the comprehensive 2019 Australian Health Management Plan for Pandemic (Influenza) and why did this happen? https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2022/05/australian-health- management-plan-for-pandemic-influenza-ahmppi.pdf It recommended against the most destructive of the Government responses including: - Mask wearing - "No evidence" of effectiveness. Masking the entire, non- symptomatic population was not even considered. - Border closures - International - "Overall, the quality of the evidence available about the effectiveness of border measures is low". Internal travel restrictions - Not recommended in general as benefits are likely to be minor. Effectiveness - Minor. Direct & Secondary costs - High" - School closures - Proactive - "Not generally recommended. The level of disruption is likely to outweigh benefits". Reactive- "Not recommended unless the disease has high clinical severity or children are a group at risk of complications". - Workplace closure - "Not generally recommended. Effectiveness - moderate. Direct costs & Secondary costs - High. Costs include effects on profits, availability of goods and services, and job security. Modelling has estimated the macroeconomic impacts of school and workplace closure are likely to exceed costs caused by the pandemic itself. - Cancellation of mass gatherings - "Not generally recommended. Benefits are uncertain. Secondary costs - High". It recommended: - Antivirals for treatment of cases - "Recommended for all cases during the Initial Action stage. Benefits - Treatment may reduce symptoms and thus reduce morbidity and mortality, and decrease disease transmission to contacts. It may also contribute to the prevention of secondary bacterial infection. One may well ask what is the point of having a timely, comprehensive, and especially in hindsight prophetic National document if it is summarily thrown out as soon as exactly the scenario it was designed to prevent occurred? The Australian people need to know why and how this now sadly brilliant plan was ignored, because the result has been devastating for our population and economy. 2. The Australian People whose taxes have/are paying for the Covid-19 mRNA Treatments, at the very least need to know what the arrangements were/are with the Vaccine Manufacturers. The secrecy around these arrangements is unconscionable on every level. - What is the cost of the Covid-19 injections to date - What are Australia's ongoing commitments - Why was enough product for up to or above 10 x injections for the Australian population purchased initially as the public were being told that an initial injection plus one follow up booster were a full course for 95% protection against infection and transmission. On what were these demonstrably false figures based? - Why and how was immunity for the manufacturers granted and is that immunity legal in light of the 3. What were the Regulatory Bodies that were supposed to be working for the Australian people really doing and what was their motivation? - Therapeutic Goods Administration - the TGA's complete maladministration in relation to approval of the novel mRNA treatments and their unexplainable lack of testing or checks on the contents, genotoxicity and long-term safety of the products is fairly easily explained by the fact they are a clear example of regulatory capture. They are 94% funded by the pharmaceutical companies whose products they are supposed to police. How did this happen and why was this not an obvious danger signal prior to Covid-19? Their complete lack of due diligence in relation to the glaring signals of the Covid-19 products danger since their implementation is only able to be described as malfeasance that has resulted in unnecessary death of Australian men, women and children, including the unborn. - Australian Health Professionals Regulatory Agency - the gagging of the entire medical profession by AHPRA with its 9 March 2021 Position Statement - Registered health practitioners and students and COVID-19 vaccination was in all likelihood one of the darkest days for the Medical Industry in the history of this nation. It removed any remnants of Doctor /patient privilege, informed consent and the ability of Doctors to treat patients as individuals - the basis for providing the best treatment for each person as an individual using a physicians knowledge of their distinct history and circumstances being the bedrock of best practice. Unfortunately, one truth and one size fits all healthcare has proven to be instrumental in the excess death statistics and the monumental harms from the mRNA experiment. How an experimental treatment, with no safety data was able to be mandated by the Government on any of our population in breach of everything from the Siracusa Principles to the Nuremberg Code and Australian Immunisation Handbook, and who should pay for the damage done is on its own topic enough for a Royal Commission, and the instigation of Criminal proceedings. Mrs Karen Fox. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0259 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0262 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0262.pdf UNOFFICIAL I am a private free Australian who has been working in a clinical capacity in the public healthcare system for approximately 10 years. My faith in the integrity and honesty of the Government and the entire public healthcare system has been terminally affected by the years following the start of the pandemic. Government and Corporate partnerships combined with secrecy and censorship from the Australian people have been the primary drivers of this loss of trust. The major issues plaguing Australia's pandemic response were: Transparency From the beginning of the pandemic Australian's were kept in an information vacuum apart from the corporate media who fed us a steady diet of sensationalist fear porn. National cabinet was formed in order that the federal government could implement their covid response via the State Premiers. These meetings were kept secret, and the government fought tooth and nail to keep information from the Australian people when former Senator Rex Patrick lodged a FOI request. Rather than be open with the Australian people the government chose instead to introduce the COAG Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 (COAG bill) which further erodes the democratic principles of this country. https://lsj.com.au/articles/the-debate-over-national-cabinet/ The Australian Government entered into hasty and secret commercial in-confidence deals with private corporations who have a history of fraud and unethical behaviour, in order to secure inadequately tested gene therapies for use on the Australian people. These deals to this day have not been disclosed and there is mounting evidence questioning the safety of these flawed therapies. The Governments secrecy and lack of transparency have led to an all time low in trust in our political institutions and any inquiry needs to look at strengthening the rights of Australians to access information in order that they may make an informed decision about Government decisions that seriously affect their lives. Conflicts of interest The TGA is almost exclusively funded by the industry it is supposed to be regulating. Only 7% of the TGA's funding comes from public sources. This is one of the lowest amounts for a therapeutic regulatory agency in the world. In addition to this, many of the TGA's high ranking employees go on to lucrative careers in the pharmaceutical industry after their tenure at the TGA, or they rely directly or indirectly on pharmaceutical funding in their academic careers. An example of this is|‘ https://www.health.gov.au/committees-and-groups/australian-technical-advisory-group-on- immunisation-atagi?language=und#members Attached is the document titled Conflict of Interest which outlines many more of these conflicts by members of Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI). UNOFFICIAL UNOFFICIAL Many of our high-ranking public servants have links to organisations such as the WHO and the | ■which places into question their independence when they have affiliations with organisations that have the potential to profit financially from Australia's Pandemic Our regulatory agencies need to be unshackled from reliance on funding from the industries that they regulate. This will always be a fundamental conflict of interest and undermine the public confidence in their independence. In addition to this, executives in control of public health and regulatory agencies should not be allowed to benefit financially or professionally from the industry they regulate for a specified period during, and after, their employment within government agencies. Censorship Throughout the pandemic access to reliable and open information was constricted by an opaque and secretive government who provided little detail on the evidence or necessity of pandemic measures. A constant call to authority by referencing 'the experts' (no not those experts) who quite often had conflicts of interest or whose careers relied on confirming the government narrative. AHPRA ensured that registered health practitioners could not openly debate or choose to question government policy without fear of being suspended and investigated. I was one of those health practitioners who received the AHPRA warning. Our government colluded with private technology corporations to censor information contrary to the governments and the pharmaceutical industries narrative. This often involved censoring the legitimate voices of genuine experts in their respective fields who were openly debating the safety and efficacy of Australia's pandemic response. This behaviour is the sign of an illiberal and authoritarian government and bureaucracy that has no interest in the welfare and rights of the Australian people. This Orwellian control on information is now being legislated through the Disinformation/Misinformation Bill 2023. https://news.rebekahbarnett.com.aU/p/breaking-the-australian-government Freedom of speech and free access to information is a hallmark of a free society, if we lose this right, we can no longer be considered a free country and I am shocked that this simple and once treasured principle is now being openly and unashamedly threatened. Governments that have censored and controlled speech have never been the good guys. The best way to combat misinformation or a bad idea is through open and well-reasoned argument in the marketplace of ideas. With the significant resources available to the federal government and a compliant corporate media, if you cannot convince the Australian people to adopt a course of action then you are most likely either wrong, or incompetent to lead this country. UNOFFICIAL UNOFFICIAL Disregard for fundamental Human Rights The government voted against the vaccine indemnity bill further showing it has more interest in the finances of corporations and big pharma than those of the Australian people. In addition to this less than 5% of claims for compensation from the governments vaccine injury scheme have been approved. https://umbrellanews.com.au/featured/2023/06/government-stalls-on-compo-for-covid-vaccine- injuries/ Our government is also accepting international agreements in the form of the WHO's International Health Regulations (IHR) that remove reference to human rights, dignity and freedom of persons and make these agreements legally binding in International Law. These agreements would undoubtably be used during the next pandemic which according to the IHR would only need to be a 'potential' issue rather than a defined and declared event. This international agreement contains many concerning elements that effectively cede power to a single global authority whose funding relies on donors from private companies and billionaires. Below is a list of some of the concerns with the IHR's. 1. Encouraging 'Gain of function' research. 2. Giving the WHO a blank check to create new rules in the future. 3. Liability-free vaccines developed at warp speed will be produced. 4. Human rights guarantees have been removed in the new amendments. 5. Social media surveillance and censorship of citizens is required. 6. We may not learn what is in the amendments until after they are passed. 7. The WHO Director-General could become your personal physician. 8. When will the WHO be able to use its newly minted powers? https://mervlnass.substack.eom/p/eight-items-of-major-concern-regarding https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/december-deadline-who-pandemic-treaty-ihr- amendments/ In closing Australia and its people need to remain sovereign above corporations and international agreements, and all our rights should be founded on the principle of individual liberty, bodily autonomy, and freedom of expression. The only way to truly learn from the last four years and ensure that Australians are prepared and safe during the next pandemic is to hold a Royal Commission. I demand that the government cancel this weak inquiry and hold a full-blown Royal Commission into Australia's pandemic response with broad all-encompassing reference to get to the bottom of what worked, what didn't and what we need to do next time. UNOFFICIAL ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0262 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0264 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0264.pdf As a parent of two young children I have followed the State and Federal responses to Covid and continue to do so. Our family shapes our actions/activity around the most up to date independent research instead. Unfortunately, the panel presiding over this inquiry does not match this and so I can only add a vote of no confidence in these people and process. To be marking your own homework, that is misguided in the first speaks of a process nobody should accept. Independence is needed. To ignore my qualified Federal member, Dr Ananda-Rajah is deeply troubled. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0264 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0266 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0266.pdf Dr Michael Czajka 8/12/23 COVID-19Inquiry@pmc.gov.au. Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry Dear Sir/Madam, My background includes health sciences, a PhD in Chemistry (among other qualifications) and a major in law. The issues: Under S51 of the constitution, the Commonwealth has powers to make laws for (ix) Trade and commerce with other countries and states (ix) Quarantine There are many other areas within the federal domain where the Commonwealth could have asserted its powers. The response: The Commonwealth has abrogated its responsibilities under the Constitution during the Covid response. Instead of leading the states it followed. Instead of ensuring a unified response we got a piecemeal state-by-state response. Recommendation: The Commonwealth should have taken the lead on quarantine issues... rather than letting the states decide what to do. It has resulted in a piecemeal approach to COVID-19 and many unjust, excessive and poorly considered interventions. The interventions were often political rather than scientifically warranted e.g. Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews made decisions about lockdowns without his chief medical officer being present and despite advice that lockdowns were not necessary. The issue: The states' responses also interfered with trade and commerce with other states and countries. I and many others lost work due to the lockdowns. The response: Many Australians wrote to the Commonwealth asking for assistance in tempering these intemperate state responses without any visible effect. Example: I was doing work at Lang Lang (country area) working with only 1-3 other people. Despite this, I was prevented from going on site because the landlord (property owner) had banned unvaccinated individuals from entering the site. The provision of an exemption certificate was not sufficient to allow me on-site N.B. My employers did not require vaccination. I have and any myocarditis or pericarditis (or other side effect) could kill me. I did not want to risk vaccination with an mRNA vaccine (I am otherwise fully vaccinated). My doctor(s) agreed that such vaccination was undesirable but were unwilling to provide an exemption because they were worried they would be deregistered: AHPRA listed a very narrow range of reasons for issuing vaccination exemptions. It was only after I got COVID-19 (a mild illness) that I finally got a vaccination exemption N.B. My immune system works just fine so my risk is low. My age also puts me at lower risk. Recommendation: Doctors should be allowed to use their best judgement whether a patient should be given an exemption. Doctors should not be threatened with deregistration, investigation and loss of income for engaging in debate on COVID-19 issues or providing exemptions e.g. who is still unable to work. Recommendation: Non-mRNA Covid vaccines such as the Australian-produced “Vaxine” should have been supported and offered as an alternative. Outcomes: The inability to work resulted in a significant loss of income and the project we were working on was significantly delayed. Of the other people on site one finally got vaccinated and later boosted under duress. The other one was happily vaccinated till he got his booster shot and got sick. After that, he decided not to take any more boosters. He is still unwell. My other co-worker has a demonstrated allergic response to vaccinations and was unable to get an exemption... even though a vaccination could kill him or at least make him very sick. As a result, he was not allowed on site. People who had reasonable reasons for declining vaccination were discriminated against by bureaucracies that didn’t understand the issues they were dealing with. Decisions to vaccinate were made under duress i.e. Coercion. Governments were playing with people’s lives. Recommendation: Governments and bureaucrats need to be held responsible for their decisions. Currently, poor decision-making at the government level has no (or few) consequences. People need to be held accountable for their actions. Governments should not be making binding health decisions for people as their decision-making is too erratic to trust. Conclusions: Australians are disappointed that the Commonwealth government did not temper the states' responses to COVID-19 by legislating to bring some coherence at the Federal level. This resulted in poorly considered interventions, a massive blowout in costs and poor outcomes. Yours sincerely Dr Michael Czajka PhD (Chemistry) Dip App Sc Nursing Grad Dip Computing B Bus Accounting Grad Dip Education ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0266 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0268 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0268.pdf As evidenced by the terms of reference for this enquiry, this inquiry is intended to be a complete whitewash. I demand a proper Royal Commission with broad terms of reference for a proper investigation into; • corrupt vaccine procurement and secret contracts; • inexcusable waiving of liability for injection manufacturers, • mask mandates which have no scientific basis; • lockdowns which have no scientific basis; • vaccine mandates and related coercion that resulted in our community being brutalised by police, • effects to people's livelihood, • official misinformation and lies in the media regarding the ability of vaccines to block transmission, • the disgrace of establishing the secretive and inept National Cabinet, • travel restrictions that violated our freedoms, • profligate money printing that has resulted in high price inflation that affects everyone's prosperity, • fixation by authorities on inaccurate and misleading reporting of metrics relating to the event, reporting vaccine injuries; • media censorship of well-qualified individuals and groups espousing a narrative alternate to the mainstream whitewash program, • silencing of doctors and the violation of the sanctity of patient-doctor relationship, • shutting down of schools that affected so many innocent children who are otherwise unaffected by the respiratory illness, • the role of AHPRA and ATAGI in censorship and oppression of doctors, and the poor treatment of victims, • alarming excess deaths and the utter disgrace of our bureaucrats, institutions and most of our elected representatives to urgently enquire into and address excess deaths. I am letting the Government know that even though this inquiry is clearly a whitewash, the community is not happy and is demanding answers that only a Royal Commission with broad terms of reference can deliver. The government clearly does not want a Royal Commission because they don't have clean hands and have so much to hide. Though it's impossible for me to prove a causal connection, both of my parents have died recently of conditions cited by authorities as 'rare side effects' of the injections. Both my teenage children were traumatised by the government's policies relating to C19 and how it affected their schooling and have since dropped out of school, affecting their life-long opportunities as well as severely impacting our family. It is inexcusable what the government and our previously-trusted institutions have done. Culpability and harsh personal punishment needs to be laid on the perpetrators of the tragedy of the misguided C19 policies so that witless bureaucrats never try this again. Never violate our freedoms and destroy our prosperity again. Never censor us again. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0268 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0269 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0269.pdf Request of a Proper Royal Commission to Investigate: Just some of the reasons WE THE PEOPLE are asking for a proper Royal Commission to investigate - Into the Corrupt Vaccine Procurement and Secret Contracts, Payments made to individuals, business’s for injecting people. Mask Mandates - Lockdowns, Vaccine Mandates - Border Closures, Official/Government Misinformation and Lies from the Media regarding the ability of the so called Vaccines to stop transmission. Vaccine Injuries, Media Censorship, Silencing of Doctors stopping them being able to give Informed Consent, AHPRAand ATAGI role in the censorship and oppression of Doctors, Gas lighting and poor treatment of victims of vaccine injuries. Why only COVID vaccinated people are allowed on the Donor List or receive a Donor Organ. The Investigation must be done Post Haste with the RESULTS MADE PUBLIC ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0269 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0270 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0270.pdf Submission I am in full support of an inquiry into the handling of the Australian response to Covid. I was a secondary school teacher in a leadership role and lost my job due to mandates that our own prime minister at the time said were unconstitutional and illegal to enforce. My main areas of concerns are as follows: - government over reach and the breaking of constitutional laws and the Nuremberg code - vaccines administered to the public that were experimental and had not gone through testing procedures - vaccination programs run through schools where children over the age of 14 did not need parental consent to be injected - Masks, sign ins and lockdowns enforced on the population - Covid testing that was ineffective and often gave false results, saw numerous time where lemons were tested and showed a positive result - Investigate the number of vaccine injuries, they are everywhere, my nephew is one of them - Police over reach enforcing government procedures - Investigate the number of deaths in aged care after vaccination times, I know an aged care worker who left because she could not bare to watch this happen each time the vaccines came out - Children being vaccinated when they were not at risk - Investigate what nurses saw and what they are still seeing, why have they been told NOT to record if the patient in front of them is vaccinated - I personally know people in their twenties who now have heart problems and Myocarditis - Investigate died suddenly, why are athletes and seemingly healthy people dying suddenly - Investigate censorship, why were prominent and expert doctors silenced and censored on social media and media news - Why was ivermectin made illegal to administer? Why weren't people given this option to try, it is Safe and Effective - Why have the vaccines not been removed after the high rate of deaths and vaccine injuries? - Our annual death rate has increased dramatically yet there is a media black out on it, why? What is causing this huge increase? ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0270 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0271 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0271.pdf I request a proper Royal Commission for a proper investigation into; Corrupt vaccine procurement. Secret contracts. Mask mandates. Lock downs. Vaccine mandates. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0271 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0272 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0272.pdf Merrilyn Grant - On behalf of Timothy Francis Grant (deceased) Introduction: I have prepared this submission on behalf of my late husband who had a and died 6 weeks after his first AstraZeneca vaccination (May 19, 2021). My husband was in remission from cancer when he had his first AstraZeneca vaccination two weeks before the government recommended that people under 60 years of age have an alternative vaccination. He was on blood thinners and signed a form at the GP's identifying this. He was given the vaccination anyway. He had symptoms straight away - including headaches, swollen thyroid glands and a dramatic drop in his platelet count. He visited the doctors and emergency with these symptoms for 5 weeks, until his death but medical personal were not informed enough about the risks to be worried enough about his symptoms and put him on stroke alert. Key Points: - GP's were not knowledgeable enough about the vaccination and the risks involved when Tim had his vaccination. Why did the GP give Tim this vaccination when he was on blood thinners? - GP's were given a limited criteria for people to get exemptions to covid vaccination, (ie anaphylaxis) - GP's were under extraordinary pressure to give vaccinations regardless of patient history and were punished with deregistration for refusing to do so. - The criteria for a COVID vaccine related death at the time was: 4 weeks post vaccination, ELSA Test, Low Platelets and High D-Dimer. Tim's ELSA test was not definitive because the machine to do this test at^^^^^Pathology- Melbourne is old and unreliable. His blood test should have had to have gone to Sydney for a correct test and this was not done. The week 4 criteria was extended to 6 weeks the day after Tim's death and has been increased again since. Tim had high D-Dimers and showed falling platelets over a 6 week period post vaccination. - Reporting to TGA - the only response I got was a case number. TGA is largely funded by pharmaceutical companies and I don't believe this constitutes a safe and unbiased organisation for Australians to trust. - Reporting to SaefVic - These people were helpful at first and said they would send Tim's blood to Sydney for testing and to give 5 week for the results. However they never sent his blood and refused to discuss this with me further. When I requested notes on their investigation of Tim's death, they refused and they took back their offer of counselling for me. My lawyer had to go to freedom of information to get these notes and they revealed no real investigation took place. Another body set up to keep Victorians safe which did not do it's job. - COVID Vaccination Compensation Scheme: 1. This is impossible for anyone to successfully claim for death without a lawyer. 2. GP's are scared to complete the form and Tim's GP made a mark between the YES and NO box - unprepared to commit - even after a full report from a legal medical doctor found that Tim's death was a result of the AstraZeneca vaccination. 3. Submissions for compensation are submitted to non medical people who are judging from a strict criteria when every human body is individual and the criteria for a vaccine related death is still evolving and for AstraZeneca has stopped evolving because it is no longer used for safety reasons. 4. Submissions which get past the first step are then forwarded to TGA doctors for further judging (Once again TGA doctors could not be considered impartial) 5. The compensation payment for death is insulting would not even cover the average family's mortgage. 6. While the scheme is so difficult to navigate only people who can afford lawyers will be successful in death claims. This is costly and you cannot claim your lawyers costs back from the scheme. 7. For me this process is very slow has been ongoing for two years now - Internationally, other countries are much more open to compensation and transparent with finding than Australia. - How come countries who couldn't afford the vaccinations have the same COVID related death results as Australia and much lover unexplained deaths for that period than Australia? - The media scare campaign by the Government to force people to get vaccinated shamefully made people feel they were going to cause others to die if they didn't get vaccinated. This has not been proved to be true and in fact many of the claims in these campaigns have been proven false. - Why is the Australian Media unprepared to write about the facts of the roll out and consequences of the COVID Vaccinations? For the Future: 1. Never rush the implementation of a vaccination again. 2. Never give indemnity to pharmaceutical companies. If they request this then it is a sure sign that the vaccine is not ready. 3. Give GP's freedom, without criteria, on whether it is safe to vaccinate individual patients. They have each person's medical records and are in the best position to judge without repercussion to their practice. This is what they are trained for. 4. Set up a no blame compensation scheme to cover all vaccinations where people have experienced side effects or death in Australia and compensate people fairly. 5. The TGA should be fully funded by the Australian Government to be truly independent. 6. All Pathology labs should have the best possible testing equipment. 7. Never produce an advertising campaign that pits Australians against one another for any reason again. Advertising should only contain TRUE facts and in the case of COVID Vaccination you had no true facts to form a campaign. Timeline Leading to Tim's Death: Please see attached document. In Summary: It is not my job to provide terms of reference and evidence to your committee. Indeed the restrictions you have placed on the length of submissions prohibits this. You are being paid and you should seek your own evidence from the many sources available around the world to seek your own facts. Do your research and protect all Australians in the future. ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0272 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0274 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0274.pdf Submission for Covidl9 Response Inquiry Is it not the governments' job and responsibility to respond to perceived threats in a balanced and sensible way? If coming to the wrong conclusions initially, moving forward considering all new facts and correcting any miscalculations would be a common sense approach would it not? Seems like common sense was in very short supply the last three years, especially among those within governments, more concerned with the narrative and agenda that had nothing to do with health was the name of the game. For example how does making gyms non- essential but fast foods (such as McDonalds) and bottle shops essential make any sense? In a health crisis? More bizarre than that, the nonsense of the mask on , mask off/sit down/ stand up in cafes and eateries was your big mistake in making people realise that the governments were just making things up on the fly. Nothing was based in science although we were told constantly 'follow the science'. There wasn't any rhyme or reason to anything that was done and now the data has come in with warts and all. Therefore I suggest the government of the day (during the pandemic) and the now government have not corrected the record when new facts and evidence have come to light but instead have hunkered down on an old agenda, oblivious to any emerging facts making all that they have spoken and actioned in the past three years false and misleading. As a government you have roles and responsibilities towards the communities you serve and this has not been the case throughout the pandemic in the response that was carried out. There was no duty of care, the exact opposite was the reality which has been shown through the lack of studying the data that the general public over the last 3 years have now gathered from Freedom of Information requests from around the world. There are precisely 220 Freedom of Information responses that Canadian woman, has collected, from health/ science institutions from around the world, not finding any record of the correct purification/isolation of the virus. Find her results at the following link: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-around-the-world- have-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification/ If there is no evidence of any virus then how and why were the governments' responses like they were? Many peoples' lives have been changed, turned upside down and destroyed by the heavy handed responses that were taken. It's simply a case of no record of a virus found anywhere in the world, this would be a great starting point for any responsible government to come from with their tails between their legs, on bended knee begging for forgiveness from the people. We then can move forward once this simple truth is revealed to the Australian people and work from there on consequences for this failure of duty of care and lack of understanding that governments need to stay out of the lives of its people and merely serve instead of bully and harass. This must never happen again. There is a great article written by a PHD, that explains why the isolation of the virus has not been done correctly anywhere in the world. It is attached. Thank you for your time, let the truth prevail. Michelle Gail ########## END PMC-CGCRI-2023-0274 ########## ########## START PMC-CGCRI-2023-0275 ########## URL: https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/submissions/PMC-CGCRI-2023-0275.pdf COVID-19 Response Inquiry Submission - Dr. Stuart Dawson Dear Panel members, Submission to the COVID-19 Response Inquiry Panel re. ToR: Key health response measures I am the author of the accompanying research report, Navigating the COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons for the Victorian Bus Industry, written for Bus Association Victoria, which is also publicly available from its online publications page at https://www.busvic.asn.au/resources/reports-articles and directly at this URL, https://www.busvic.asn.au/sites/default/files/uploaded-content/website-content/Resources/BIIF/BIIF FINAL/18 bav pandemic report.pdf The statements and source evidence that support this submission are all documented in my report. My report was compiled from notes and research beginning from late January 2020 when it became clear that governments generally had been panicked by hypothetical worst-case scenarios modelled by Imperial College London. This in turn led to lockdown responses around the globe as urged by the London modellers, to the disregard of pre-existing pandemic management plans. This knee-jerk lockdown response allied with panic buying hysteria swept most of the globe in roughly two weeks. This submission highlights points in my report that are relevant to the Terms of Reference of this Inquiry and makes recommendations as to future pandemic responses by the Commonwealth based on that evidence, and in some few places on additional facts that have emerged since it was written. Part 1, 'Facts and figures - COVID-19 and the Victorian bus industry', graphically illustrates the COVID wave that swept through Victoria in 2020. With the benefit of hindsight it can be seen that this was a natural flu wave long before the "vaccines" (actually experimental therapeutics), and did not result in large numbers of deaths except those resulting from government bungling in the Hotel Quarantine fiasco for which Victorian CHO Sutton and Premier Andrews were largely responsible. After 1 August 2O2O's Stage 4 lockdown, Victoria became a dictatorship run by health bureaucrats. Recommendation 1 That lockdowns be rejected as an airborne (aerial) virus control measure in any future pandemic. Remember when Australian police threatened children with automatic Choking arrest - no mask c